Red, White and Blue

Last week I attended the screening of a film by British producer Bob Portal, entitled Red, White and Blue. As a film it exhibited a unique mix of explicit horror, implicit narrative and American culture. The storyline tied 3 narratives about different characters one after another into one storyline. The way the director used camera shots, edits and dialogue meant that often it was left to the audience to piece together backgrounds of each character via their dialogue-less actions. Furthermore the actual time line for the storyline wasn’t as explicit as most films, and it becomes evident at the conclusion that the narrative takes place in a far greater timescale than you expect. Only by taking note of key dialogue and compositional focuses can this be realised.
As we are looking at Genre this week, the film had all the key representational stereotypes of the Horror genre. It was set in the suburbs of Texas, which is a common location for American horrors. Furthermore the self-destructive femme fatale, the flawed war veteran and the rash band member are all representations that are both stereotypes of such American films.
One key element that both breaks the conventions and does not, is that not one of the characters was a clear ‘Protagonist’. Each main character had flaws that made them morally unjust in the eyes of the audience. Additionally, there are two killers, one which at the end is not killed. This is something that sets itself apart from conventional horrors, however is becoming common places in Horror Thrillers such as Dead Man’s Shoes (Shane Meadows) and the Saw series – in which there is no moral ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ and often the killer will escape.
Red, White and Blue was a good all round example of both conventional and un-conventional approaches to Genre in the medium of film. Considering however, that this is a study of games, it makes me wonder whether other games have adopted a similar approach. The obvious example would be Grand Theft Auto (Rockstar) in that the player is in the place of a criminal who has to comply with dubious requests. But still this doesn’t really resonate too much with the approach of Red, White and Blue, as while Grand Theft Auto sparked huge controversy with its Viewpoint, the narrative structure ultimately remained the same.  The only way it changes is that the player begins in a state of Disequilibrium (getting shot by Catalina in a cutscene, escaping jail, etc.) to slowly progress to the main conflict and resolution. Many games adopt this tactic, such as Uncharted 2, whereby the player begins with a gunshot wound, hanging off a cliff.
The only game that really uses multiple running narratives in the timeline I would say is Resident Evil Zero (of course this is only off the top of my head – there will probably be multiple games that do this) in that you can switch between two characters in the middle of play. Furthermore each character progresses when not controlled. One may be being attacked while you play suddenly, meaning you have to switch to that character or run to save them. It is this which relates more to the convention breaking aspects of Red, White and Blue.
Having studied Genre last year in a Media course, I have a reasonable understanding of areas of it, however it is still interesting to look at contemporary films and games, and how they deal with both Genre and Narrative.

Definitions of Game and Play

Definition of Play
Play cannot truly be defined. Players will experience ‘’play’’ as the rules of a game are set into motion and experienced. It can be explained that Games are but a Subset of play, as Games are only a small part of what Play can be.
Play can be placed into three different categories:


Gameplay: The acceptance and interaction of players with the formal rules of a game.
Ludic Activities: Forms of play that are not ‘games’ such as two children playing with a ball. Ludic activities constitute being playful, but never have a formal element – such as rules
Acting Playful: Being in the state of mind that is playful and acts both in opposition and according to rules. Such things as puns, jokes and both ludic and game play all are considered in the bracket of ‘’acting playful’’.
Other ways of describing play would be to say that: Play is free movement within a more rigid structure. Play emerges both because of and in opposition to more rigid structures. (Rules of Play, Eric Zimmerman/ Katie Salen, pg311)


The best way to explain that extract is to look at both play and ‘loopholes’ players will find in games. Some players will accept game worlds and play according to the rules. Others will find ways to oppose the structure of the game (glitches/ Mods). Another way this is done is by using colloquial language (in which the person playfully challenges conventional language).
One interesting element to play is that it can be ‘Transformative’. This means some play can evolve (or transform) into something else entirely. An example of this is when you might make some form of joke amongst friends, which might then cause a series of jokes along the same lines as the joke made – which might cause an informal competition. It is at these points where play has changed shape – from acting playful to some form of ‘game’ in a matter of moments.


Anthropologist Roger Caillois uses ‘’four fundamental categories’’ to define play. These are:


Agon: Competitive play
Alea: Chance based play
Mimicry: Simulation or ‘make believe’ play
Ilinx: Vertigo or physically based play
And these categories can further be divided into Ludus (Rule bound play) or Paida (free form play). Caillois structure is not strict, as play is often formed from several of these elements at once.


Definition of Games


Games have had many definitions over the years. In Half Real: Video Games between fictional and real worlds, Jesper Juul has considered all of these definitions and constructed his own, which has 6 key features:

1.       Games are Rule Based

2.       Variable, quantifiable outcome: Games have variable, quantifiable outcomes

3.       Valorisation of outcome: different interactions in the game have either positive or negative outcomes

4.       Player effort: The player needs to exert some effort to influence the outcome

5.       Player attached to outcome: depending on the positive or negative outcome, the player will feel happy or unhappy.

6.       Negotiable consequences: a choice can be made whether the game will affect the players in real life.

Other theorists have had their own theories about this – such as Johan Huizinga who describes that when players begin to play a game, they will surrender themselves to the rules and social etiquette of said game, forming a ‘magic circle’ as they all follow the rules of the game – unlike the rest of society. He further says that a game cannot influence real life. This, Jesper Juul, proves to be an incorrect view of games, as many games such as Poker have tournaments. Many people create a livelihood from their success at these games. This is the reason for number 6 of his definition – in that players can choose whether the game will have tangible consequences.


For both of these definitions, I have studied and in some cases made reference to the following books;
Half Real (Jesper Juul, MIT Press, 2005)
Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals (Katie Salen/ Eric Zimmerman, MIT Press, 2004)
Games Design Workshop: A Playcentric approach to creating innovative games (Tracy Fullerton, Elsevier Inc, 2008)

Looking at my Board Game project in terms of Play and game:

1.              Games are Rule Based - Our board game has several rules. Each player must take it in turns to roll the die to travel around the board. If they land on a Build square, they collect a build card. Conversely if they land on a Star square, they must pick up a miscalculation card. A player cannot have more than one build card at once, but if they land on a delivery square the piece specified on their build card is placed on their build area. When the player passes their build area whilst holding a build card, they place the piece specified in their built area. The winner is the player who has collected all of the pieces and built their robot

2.              Variable, quantifiable outcome: There are several outcomes in this game. Win and loss are the simple ones. Then you have the smaller internal outcomes that are based on chance. They could be rewarding the player money, allowing them to place a piece back on the board or it could even be the act of no significant outcome for that turn. They are all reliant on the way the player has rolled the die or how the miscalculation cards had been shuffled in the pre-game stage

3.       Valorisation of outcome: different interactions in the game have either positive or negative outcomes – Everything in the game has a positive or negative outcome depending on the player. Picking up a miscalculation card that grants the player money would be a positive outcome to that player, but negative to everyone else. Conversely that player losing money would have the reverse outcome. Once the die has been cast the player can either land on a blank, star, build or delivery square. Each one would appear to be positive, however landing on a build square while holding a piece would be negative - As would the player landing on a miscalculation square and picking up a negative card.

4.      Player effort: Every time the player rolls the dice they are affecting the outcome of the game. In some ways while there is the illusion of control, essentially the game is luck based.

5.      Player attached to outcome: Through the effort the player has made and the act of the player submitting to the rules of play, they are immediately attached to the outcome of the game.

6.      Negotiable consequences: The players can choose amongst themselves whether or not to bet anything on the overall outcome of the game.

The types of play that the players would experience while playing would be Gameplay (as by playing the game they are engaging with Gameplay) Acting playful (although this might not be the case for some players, it is expected as a board game is played as a social event rather than as a forced experience of gameplay).
Whether or not the player would experience transformative play when they are playing Build it up is difficult to gauge as it could be anything (from 3D building of the robots in the game to wanting to build an object, to competition of who can build the best object, etc.). However it is not difficult to determine whether or not build it up would fit with Roger Caillois 4 areas of play;


Agon: Board-games have a set Win / Loss structure so it would definitely be competitive play.
Alea: The game is determined by chance based tools wielded by the player so it again would comply with this rule
Mimicry: While our game is in no way a simulation, some players might see fit to engage with the loose fiction that surrounds the board game, although this might be unlikely.
Illinx: The player has to physically build an object, move pieces and roll the die. This means that they have to physically interact with the game – however, whether or not the players ‘play’ with the pieces is not concrete.


As the game is rule bound Ludus is also evident when players are playing the Build It Up board game.




As you can see most games can follow the definitions that have been set by theorists Jesper Juuls and Roger Caillois, but yet does this mean that Games and Play have been properly defined yet?
Personally I think not. Games and Play are one of few subjects that I don’t think can ever be bound by words and definitions. Sure, meaning can be placed behind every area of them, but they can never truly be described.










MISC




An analysis of First Person Shooters and the varying views between Halo and Call of Duty made several nights ago after having studied the definitions of games)


Analysis of a certain area of play within a modern videogame
Having been studying what both games and play are, it has helped me analyse many different grievances a player faces. For example, players will often get angry or abusive should first person shooters not have their desired outcomes – for instance my friend will get angry if a player does not die in a specified number of bullets. This grievance has been caused from the conventional feeling of a game. Games are rule orientated. They give a player a set goal or at least groups of rules that a player will subconsciously pick up upon.  In the case of a First Person Shooter the game will allocate how much damage a character can take before being killed. This may be four bullets or one. The key point is that as a player progresses they begin to gain an understanding of how each weapon ‘handles’. By this I mean the points such as recoil, damage caused and how opposition will react to this. As this grows, as does a players expectation that the gun will abide by these rules. When gaming online the rules get ‘twisted’ by the whole online play aspect. Several players will be playing – expecting their responses to be as sharp as offline play and their guns to do just as much damage. This is the crux of the problem. When internet strength or server responsively is low, suddenly players may find that the pre-set expectation differs from the reality on screen. ‘’When playing Call of Duty I find that it may take 1 bullet sometimes or 4, depending on the game’’ (T. Bircham on the qualities of a Sniper weapon online).


I would say that the players own playing expectations often are behind such arguments between fans of certain game genres. The classic example is the Call of Duty V Halo arguments. Both games are known to have a solid fan base and huge reputations among the FPS genre. But yet fans from opposing games will often criticise the other game. Why is this? Well the key here I feel is expectations – at least when it comes to the criticising of gameplay.
When a player plays Call of Duty they will know the guns, maps and tactics of play. Conversely when playing Halo this knowledge becomes useless as another set of rules and tactics need to be employed.  And this fact is what aggravates many fans of either franchise. They will have a one sided knowledge of one style of gameplay, so when the internal rules are vastly altered for the same genre they will still try to abide to the previous games rules.
Again using Halo as an example, in the game, player characters each have ‘shields’ and health. By having two layers of health – each visible, the tactics are a little different. Four bullets from an assault rifle – something that would likely kill a Call of Duty character, will barely penetrate a player’s shield. The value to kill a shielded player is more likely to be in the realm of 15 -25 bullets. This base fact will heavily alter the balance of play for inexperienced Halo players that are veteran Call of Duty players. Furthermore if you then apply internal rules such as ‘plasma weapons’ and heavy weapons, that each have varying degrees of damage, then Call of Duty experienced players may struggle to adjust. This will lead to frustration as the game will be hard and have detrimental social implications. This may lead to switching off the game and then the player’s viewpoint will be focused upon those elements discovered on that first playing experience.


This issue of transferal of rules can be applicable to other forms of game other than video games. For example play with a pack of cards. There are numerous different game variations stemming from those playing cards – be it blackjack, poker, etc. Some games even have variations within the game variants (i.e.: Texas Hold’em Up poker in relation to conventional poker).




This is what I feel personally is the issue behind such games. It is not something that can really be addressed by changing a game. It is all about the experience of playing. This again is critical in the argument that games are but a subset of play. A problem with play on the whole cannot be solved by modifying the game.

Notes on Lecture presentation

Framing Systems

• Formal System - a formal system of rules, self-contained and

closed. Strictly strategic and mathematical.

• Experiential System - an experiential system of play. Either

open or closed - the player and their strategic game actions

only = closed; emotional states of mind, distractions of the

environment, reputation of game = open.

• Cultural System - an open system considering the way that

the game intersects with society, history, language and wider

culture.

Chess as a Formal

System

• Objects = pieces on the board and board itself.

• Attributes = characteristics given to objects by the

rules: ways of moving, hierarchy of pieces.

• Internal Relationships = the actual position on the

board of pieces; one piece threatening another, some

removed.

• Environment = the play of the game itself is the

environment for the interaction of objects. Play

Provides context for the formal elements of the game.

Friday, 15

Chess as a Experiential

System

• Objects = the players themselves.

• Attributes = the pieces each player controls, and the current

state of the game.

• Internal Relationships = if players are objects their

interaction constitutes internal relationships: strategic

interaction plus social, psychological, and emotional

communication as well.

• Environment = not just the board and pieces but immediate

environment or context of play. May include mode of play

(physical or mediated) and preconceptions of play.

Chess as a Cultural System

• Objects = the game of Chess itself in its broadest cultural sense.

• Attributes = designed elements of the game and how, why, when,

and by whom was the game made and used.

• Internal Relationships = the links between the game and culture.

Is there a symbolic relationship between black and white? Racial,

good versus evil etc.

• Environment = the total environment itself for cultural framing of

Chess is all of culture itself, in all its forms.

Friday, 15

(Lecture presentation extract)

Looking at the Build it up board-game using the Framing Systems:

This was an extract from Friday’s lecture which introduced looking at what games and play are in the purest definition. In lecture it was discussed about 'Framing Systems' and using them to analyse games. I felt the best way to try and understand this system was by through looking at my own project using the three categories.

Formal system

-         Objects = playing pieces, the game board, cards, currency and the robot parts them selves

-         Attributes = Characteristics given to the objects by the cards and the dice roll

-         Internal Relationships = the placement of the playing pieces in relation to the playing squares (how close one is to a build/ star square), the passing of a build area, the values of importance given to each build card relative to game progress.

-         Environment = the play of the game itself is the environment for the interaction of objects. Play provides context for the formal elements of the game.

Experiential System

-         Objects = the player themselves and the dice

-         Attributes = position of the playing pieces, amount of currency in circulation and the current state of the game.

-         Internal Relationships = if the player and the dice are the objects, then the relationship between the two can be considered internal. The implications of the dice can be seen through social, communicational and emotional reactions of the players, which then will affect the strategic formula of current play.

-         Environment= not just the board but the area around the board, the context for which the game is being played and that which brought the game to the player (reasons for playing)

Cultural System

-         Objects =  the game ‘build it up’ in the broadest cultural sense

-         Attributes=  the internal elements of the game –when, how and why they were made and by whom

-         Internal relationships= the link between the game and culture? Is the fact the player is building a robot for an oppressive government a criticism of the current regime? Is the art style meant to be a satirical or accurate representation on the views of military and the future in 1920’s?

-         Environment = all of culture itself frames the cultural environment of the game.

I am not sure whether this is the correct ‘answer’ to framing my Board Game as the framing systems, while detailed and explore every possible outlook, are cryptic and hard to understand. Nevertheless, I feel that was at least a fair attempt at analysing using that system. However difficult it was, this has revealed a way of breaking down games into the basest ideals – free of the subconscious views of a player, and is something that I will strive to understand better in the future.

Games Design Workshop: A playcentric approach to creating innovative games

I have been reading through Games Design Workshop – a playcentric guide to making games and these are just some of the aspects of games design that I learnt about from just reading some of the book:

Iterative process.  The iterative process relies heavily on audience feedback to help craft a successful game. Throughout the process, they; Formulate ideas, formalise ideas, test ideas and evaluate the results. If there is no problem then they move on. They do this before finalising the artwork and piece. By doing this a games designer can create the best possible experience for a gamer.
''When you design, design with toys, books, films; soundtracks, clothing lines and other franchise extensions you can think of. In addition to that design these things for your audience, not yourself or your team''. - American McGee (Interview in Games Design Workshop: a Playcentric approach to games design, page 46)

Now from a personal perspective, I would both agree and disagree with that statement. While the key to a successful and fun will always be a positive experience from the gaming community, I would say that it is important that the design team and other members feel as though they are working towards something they would play. If this is the case, self-motivation becomes simple as they strive to work together to produce something that they themselves want. It is finding this balance between audience and team enthusiasm for the product that I think is important. Nevertheless a constant stream of audience feedback is important to achieve this.

Another interesting view GDW: A Playcentric approach to creating innovative games presents is that of different 'games. Scott Kim - graphic and puzzle designer, describes a ''Hierarchy '' of games on page 38:
Game - Winning
Puzzle - Goal
Toy - No Goal
Story - No Interaction

He described how often these types of play combine to create a good game. ''To design a good puzzle, first design a good toy”. This would continue up the 'Hierarchy''. It is an interesting viewpoint that definitely rings true.


It is clear how solid and impressive this resource is to understanding games, the industry and how to make games. The book includes small exercises to reinforce the information, that is presented in a way that is easy to read - and further backed up with critical interviews with revered games designers and teachers. The book looks into all areas of games making including areas such as:

Prototyping: This book has taught me how important it is to prototype everything – even if it is just a rough paper copy with notes. Prototyping means that the core gameplay mechanics are there and the more these are playtested and feedback taken, the better the overall product will be. This already was shown in the board-game design project. Having only a rough paper template to playtest with, our group still gathered important information that has crafted our approach. Had we chosen to not playtest as the prototype was too ‘base’ that information would have been lost.

Play-testing and focus groups: Focus groups are purely for the generation of ideas. There is no bias or forced opinions. Everyone must get their fair share of vocal input on your idea or concept. Furthermore focus groups might have to be cut short or not have the desired effect should members of the focus group sway others with their opinions.
Play-testing should be carried out throughout the production process, and can be done so in three ways – within the design team, with close friends and family and with complete strangers or people outside of the production. When play testing it is important to study, not dictate. By this I mean not to explain every element to the players but let them figure it out on their own. Ask them to speak their thought process and only interfere when they cannot progress and note these points down.

Generating Ideas: Use everything from mind maps to a bowl full of random words and try to implement as many different viewpoints and opinions as possible.

This extensive coverage of games design has changed my view on the design process and given me some invaluable structure and ideas to work from when I do any kind of production or design.

Personal Games History

1) Croc (1997, developed by Argonaught software and published by Fox interactive for the Playstation) As one of the first 3D platform games on the PlayStation console in general it received good reviews from the gaming media. So much so that a second game was released in 1999 and two other ports were made for mobile phones. The games developers for those games no longer exist so the games cannot be bought.

Croc oddly enough wasn’t the first game I played, but rather the first game I can remember watching. At the time I was only a few years old but I can still remember how the bright colours, surreal worlds and colourful characters really enticed me into wanting to become part of that world. I would say that, the feelings I got from watching my brother play croc at an early age really showed in the early games I would consider to be in my games history.

2) Super Mario Kart (1993, developed by Nintendo EAD and released by Nintendo for the SNES)

Selling over 8 Million Copies worldwide, it is often considered one of the greatest games of all time and the origins of all kart based racing games- with top games magazines like Edge and the website IGN, naming it as such. With the game recorded as the SNES's top selling game of all time, Nintendo saw fit to re-release it on wiiware in Europe on April 2010. Further Karting sequels have been released over the years for the different Nintendo consoles - all receiving certain all round positive praise from the media.

Sequels: Mario Kart 64 (Nintendo 64) , Mario Kart: Super Circuit ( Game Boy Advance), Mario Kart: Double Dash (Game Cube), Mario Kart DS (Nintendo DS), and Mario Kart Wii (Wii)

Other gaming brands have created 'kart' based games - the most notable being Crash Team Racing for the PlayStation 1.

Super Mario Kart was a game that I used to play around my neighbour’s house when I was younger.  At the time, I had not really had too much experience with multiplayer games, so the game was a revelation to me. It allowed me a way to competitively take on friends and family and while at the time I wasn’t great, my memories of that game caused me to buy Crash Team Racing (A game that while it doesn’t make my own games history, I would consider to be the best kart based racing game of all time)

 

3) Crash Bandicoot 2: Wrath of Cortex (1997, developed by Naughty Dog and released by Universal Interactive Studios for the PlayStation)

Crash Bandicoot 2: Wrath of Cortex was the sequel to Crash Bandicoot, and like its predecessor, was generally well received by gaming critics. One key critique however, was that it didn’t add to the genre. Nevertheless, Crash Bandicoot 2 solved many of the problems from the first game, offered 'bonus' levels and had multiple ways (or goals) to complete in single levels - meaning replayability was there.

From a personal viewpoint, what made me adore this game enough to be included in my 'personal history' was the sheer fun that could be had both playing and watching. The voice acting added much needed humour to the game and this became a blueprint for the great platformers from generation to generation. Furthermore the gameplay was simple, fun and somewhat wacky and had universal appeal. It was close in choice between this game, and Spyro the dragon as both games I could place in my top ten favourite games - which perhaps is a signal of how much quality was placed into early games. In both Crash Bandicoot and Spyro, they had brilliant characters, music (even now thinking about Spyro, it makes me instantly think about the music) and level design. This is something that may have been lost in more modern games.

The game was much more successful than croc and led to the production of several sequels:

                                                        Crash Bandicoot 3

                                                        Crash Bandicoot: Wrath of Cortex

                                                        And Crash Bandicoot: Twinsanity

Other sequels or spin offs have taken the game in a different direction (with Mind over Mutant and Crash of the Titans having different voice actors, gameplay and graphical style (coincidently slowly receiving worse reception by fans and critics alike). Crash Bash and Crash Team Racing (which also had the sequels: Nitro Kart and Tag Team racing) retained the original style.

                   

4) Pokémon Red - (1996, developed by Gamefreak and released by Nintendo for the Original Gameboy)

Released in Europe and America a year later, Pokémon Red and Blue editions were a revolution for the Gameboy system. Launched just after the series had become a phenomenon worldwide, the game had received exceptional reviews, and is now in the Guinness book of records for the Best Selling RPG for the Gameboy and the Best Selling RPG of all time in 2009.

It is easy to see why it holds such a massive appeal, and a cult fan base. The game introduced a strong competitive multiplayer that meant that family members and friends could battle their Pokémon using a link cable. Furthermore, Pokémon could be traded across systems (and even evolve via this method). The game series encapsulated every aspect of what players would want - Playability (a long lasting single player experience that could continue after it had finished), Competitive modes (meaning that unlike most RPG's at the time, the time spend levelling characters could be used to accomplish something outside of the game world - giving non RPG fans reasons to play), trading and finally the Pokedex system that appealed to the collective side of a gamer - giving them 150 Pokémon to collect. Satoshi Tajiri - the games designer also included Mew - a secret 151st Pokémon, which sparked rumours and myth about the creature thought only attainable at Nintendo Events. As a Player it was the perfect game, as it was fun, competitive and compelling. Additionally there was the fact it was available for the Gameboy - which meant that the game could be played on the go- wherever, whenever.

The series has grown with the Anime and comics, which each new set of Pokémon meaning a new set of games:

Red and Blue - Gameboy

Yellow - Gameboy

Gold and Silver - Gameboy colour

Crystal - Gameboy Colour

Ruby and Safire - Gameboy Advance

Emerald - Gameboy Advance

Pearl and Diamond - Nintendo DS

Platinum - Nintendo DS

and Black and White - Nintendo DS/ 3DS

The older editions of the game have been re-released later on other consoles (Fire Red and Leaf Green - Gameboy Advance, and Soul Silver and Heart gold - Nintendo DS (incorporating its own pedometer system - allowing Pokémon to be caught and levelled while on the move)

5) Final Fantasy 8 - (1999, developed and released by Square for the PlayStation 1)

At the time, it was the eighth instalment of the cult franchise. As a gamer, I would consider this to be the 'best' one however it could be said that my own viewpoint has been clouded by nostalgia and the influence it has had on my life. As of 2003, the game has shipped 8.3 million copies worldwide and was voted the 22nd best game ever released in a Japanese magazine - Famitzu. Currently the game can be downloaded - along with VII and IX on PlayStation Network; the online marketplace for the PlayStation 3. Of course, with its cult status, this game is considered a rarity and can be bought from between £20 and £100+ for second hand/ New PlayStation copies retrospectively.

               My own opinion on the game was that it was one of the finest pieces of storytelling on the PlayStation console, and the sheer volume of content in the game made it have a play through time of over thirty hours easily. Furthermore at the time the graphics were incredible in comparison to other games on the original PlayStation. The graphical artwork was a unique mix of Japanese comicking and realism - inspiring my own passion for Japanese artwork. It was due to this game that many of my 'single-player' orientated games tended to be RPG's later in my buying history (it was here that depth and playability could be found in abundance).

(Sequels I have bought

of this game in order            - Final Fantasy X

of aquisition  )                        Final Fantasy X-2

                                             Final Fantasy XII

                                             Final fantasy VII

                                             Final Fantasy IX

                                             Final Fantasy IV

                                             Final Fantasy XI

                                             Final Fantasy XIII

                                             Final Fantasy VI

(The game currently has a total of 14 traditional console based games; however it has numerous handheld console games. Their Tactics series, XII revenant wings and remakes of number 4 and 5 are available on the ds. However the PSP exclusively has Final Fantasy 7: Crisis Core, Final Fantasy Dissidia and news speculates of the development of a second Dissidia. Furthermore the franchise has t-shirts, figures, soundtracks and soft drinks available - however most of which are needed to be imported from japan (the soundtracks are also available on iTunes)

6) Grand Theft Auto 3 (2001, developed by DMA Design (Now Rockstar) and published by Rockstar games for the PlayStation 2)

While not the first 3D sandbox made, it is considered to be the largest influence on the development of 3D sandbox games - at least for the conventional systems. Its popularity led to the several sequels and ports - most of which were critically acclaimed, although it is this games leap from 2D bird’s eye view to 3D sandbox that made it so. Players had three distinct islands that they could progress through - being able to walk, sprint, jump, drive and fly (a singular small plane) their way around the map. The AI for the time was considered advanced, as many NPC's would populate the screen at once, all having distinct reactions to the players actions. Furthermore, the narrative and storyline was littered with strange and dark characters, all with unique missions that would vary depending on the tasks set.

Of course, the nature of the game often grabbed highlights, being banned in Australia and some places in America due to the violent and sexual actions a player could take - also leading to many stores checking ID's more frequently. Nevertheless, as a gamer, I consider this to be a benchmark for gaming of that era. Unlike many games having a set amount of 'Lives' at the players disposal, GTA3 removed this, meaning that while players could not indefinitely lose the game, they had freedom to do as they pleased within the game world. And this game world would alter depending on the time of day and weather conditions - yet another advanced display from the developers at the time of release.

While I was too young to be playing it, I found that the game was enticing not because of the violence or sexual content, but rather because the game allowed you to be playful. Most games at that time were fun, yes, but didn’t allow you to experiment with the gameplay. GTA 3 allowed me a chance to experiment, to make my own game within the game. An example of this is a game that my brother and I used to play. Switching on cheats that gave normal pedestrians weapons, made they hate both each other and the player, the rules were that we would take it in turns to see who could make it across all three islands, without being killed. At each island we had to stop in the safe house before proceeding. In the end neither of us could make it to the final island (around 65% of pedestrians would have rocket launchers) but even so, it is the fact that GTA 3 allowed games to be made within the game that was so interesting and caused it to make my games history

7) Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (2003, developed by BioWare and published by Lucas Arts for the Xbox)

Star wars: Knights of the Old Republic was one of BioWare's benchmark RPG's and could be considered to have been the start point for Mass Effect for the Xbox 360. Star Wars: KOTOR utilised a combat system that was said to be derived from table top turn based RPG's such as Dungeons and Dragons and Wizards of the Coasts: Star Wars Role Playing game. The combat employs a hidden twenty sided dice role that determines what damage a player will do. A player can queue up several moves at once, but nevertheless the combat remains turn based.

The real unique aspect to this game was not the combat, but rather the conversation and 'moral' systems that could reward savvy players and continue the customisation. The player could be confronted with a certain situation (i.e.: persuading someone to give up a vital item for your quest). You could choose to try and talk your way through using persuasion, go off and do something for him, or kill him. Each of these has its own consequences in the game world and with your team members. Killing him could cause an entirely different fight further down the line, and make you lose favour with a team mate. Or you could do the quest and he could help you out later. This was something that a player might come across once or twice and think little of it. However, much later in the game it could cause a reaction that is large. It is due to this that the game can be played multiple times, each causing a different set of results and problems.

This system can be seen in both Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins - much more recent BioWare games. As can the moral system that was first used in Star Wars: KOTOR. The system would give either Dark Side or Jedi points to a player, all reliant on their interactions with the NPC's. And in doing so they could cause their appearance to change and the way other members of the party interact with them - adding yet another customisable element to the gameplay.

This game had a sequel for the original Xbox: Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic 2 - The Sith Lords. It retained many of the features of the first - but allowed the player to influence the teammate’s beliefs

What I loved about this game was the sheer replay ability to it. I have played this game for easily in excess of 70 hours (just the first game) over its lifespan. Often I would take a route I had never taken before in the conversation and discover a completely different way that my team mates or the world would look at my character. The most extreme change I found was in one conversation, I managed to turn half of my own team against me, eliminating them for the story. It was a shock, but made me appreciate just how much time had been spent crafting a brilliant story for the game that could be altered at the players whim.

8) Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (2006, developed and published by Bethesda studios (with 2K Games) for the Xbox 360)

Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion was released a few months after the Xbox 360 and answered RPG fans calls for a dedicated RPG on the system. Offering a vast world for players to explore, with over 100 dungeons/ruins/ points of interest in the wild, around 50 side quest, 4 large guild arcs and an extensive main quest, Oblivion was both large in gameplay size and play area ( it is said to be around 16 square kilometres ). It was well received by critics - with PC gamer listing it as number 1 on their 'top 100 games ever' in 2007.

As a console gamer to see the level of detail that was put in was incredible, as was the AI - which allowed NPC's to construct a daily routines based around their environment and jobs.      

It felt like a living world, something that only really massively multiplayer RPGs tend to achieve and due to this it was easy to become immersed. Furthermore, with the introduction of Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine packs, the expansive game world was extended even further.

There are so many reasons this reached the game’s history. Huge storyline, vast and expansive world, limitless possibilities to cause mayhem among the advanced AI villagers, are just some of the reasons. For me though, it was the fact that as I gamer I played the game so much that I could guide a friend around the map or through a quest - just by knowing what point he was at. While this isn’t something to boast about, as a gamer that is somewhat casual generally, just having such ridiculous knowledge of the game world was an achievement in itself for the game. If a game can entice someone to know everything about it, then the gameplay and story have been exquisitely crafted. And Oblivion definitely fits that category

9) Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots (2008, developed and released by Konami for the Playstation 3)

Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots was the final instalment of the storyline based around the character Snake - beginning around 20 years ago. The game received widespread perfect reviews and critical acclaim for its dramatic story elements, smooth gameplay and stunning graphics. On a personal note, I would consider it to have the finest graphics for a console game at the moment - only rivalled by Uncharted 2: Among Thieves.

The game features over 3 hours of cutscene footage, and accurate recreations of several locales - including a War-torn middle east and also some of the previous game locations, such as the Shadow Moses Complex. The game is broken up into five acts and two epilogues.

The reason for choosing this game in my games history is simple. As a video-game, it is the peak of today’s games in my opinion. Of course this will eventually change, but considering that the game is two years old, it is incredible how it still can be seen as such.

10) ModNation (Most Recent game played) (2010, developed by United front games and released by Sony Computer entertainment for the Playstation 3)

 ModNation was the most recent game that I have played. Technically it is considered to be a 'kart racing game' - much like Mario Kart, however it has taken the videogame Littlebigplanet's emphasis on user generated content and tracks and applied it to the genre. Now players can build their own characters, karts and tracks using thousands of options. Having just begun my look into game design, it is games that use this method that are both clever and intricate. By a developer identifying the aspects of the genre and implicating them into a track/ map maker, they can draw the focus away from constructing their own maps, and focus on building 'add on' packs. By doing this, a player will constantly keep buying into the company by expanding tools at their command - thus empowering them, and paying the developers at the same time.

This made my games history not through merit, as while it looked impressive and such, it didnt stand out much for me, but rather as it was the most recent game I had played.

(NOTE: Information gained from sources such as Wikipedia, (accessed at 12th October/ 13th October)