Відео

Cool video

You had to be like 6 or 7 to play it. It was a jam.

This was really helpful for conceptualizing my game's story, thanks for your insight

1:56 Not as many people played PC games because buying a computer was way more expensive, owning a computer wasn't a given like it is now.

I don't mean to be rude but your problems with the game seem to be entirely yours. You make some alright points in the topic of game-design in general, but in practice all of it just looks like minor quirks of the technology and oldschool design, which if you are playing a game this obscure and old, you're probably accustomed to already. How did you come by it? Comparing it to Super Mario Bros feels almost random, since it's a different platform, by different developers, with different design, art-style, mentality, everything. Being a 1992 game it would make more sense to compare it to 1990's Super Mario World, I suppose, but even then they seem like rather different kinds of games

These are hilarious

lol "I was not in sleep mode. I was running a simulation and it ended" talks with Joe are quite funny and immersive.

Don't play mega man!

Comparing Cosmo to Mario feels so unfair especially given Cosmo predated it by 3 years! I think the intent of the video was to use it as an example of what makes a good modern platformer, but it feels like a critique of the game and it needs a bit more historical context for that.

this is more or less exactly the experience I had with stories untold and you conveyed it thoughtfully and evenhandedly and I appreciate it

I played this game as a 4 years old. Never had any problem in figuring out how to play it :D

I would handle this problem by teasing out a transitional solution between 1st and 3rd person. By analyzing the 1st person view or by otherwise disallowing peek-cheating exploits, testing a variety of prototypes and view angles might produce a solid lead or even a solution. For battles and such where I imagine this effect being prevalent, the anxiety and tension of a battle could be captured by focusing only on the opponents view then in 3rd person, while the surroundings blur or fade. It's an interesting problem and I can see days and days playing with it!

As a kid, I didn't say. Oh this game isn't approachable. I just played it and beat it. I never beat Mario, because it was boring. But to each their own.

I think there's a reason, sort of, for such disturbing backgrounds. This game really wanted to include the parallax effect as, if I remember correctly, even the smooth, pixel-perfect movement had to be sacrificed because of that; everything moves in 8-pixel steps. So I guess then to emphasize the parallax effect, the backgrounds had to be emphasized too, which of course was a totally wrong decision.

Interesting format. Like critical thinking and logical explaining instead of emotioal video essays. This has Potential!

It's funny you mention the the design of Cosmo. I grew up playing shareware games like Cosmo as a kid in the early to mid 90's and never really felt I had any issue differentiating Cosmo from the background etc. Fast forward to my 35 year old boomer eyes and hand-eye coordination and that was the FIRST thing I noticed. That it was very difficult to go into my flow state and just play like I do with other games. I'm only 4 minutes into your video but I'm digging it!

I love hearing your thoughts on game design! Its so nice to see a take on Sonic Lost World that isnt taking a complete dump on it! Its a good game that just needed to let Sonic have more freedom instead of brute forcing 2D game design into 3D. As is, its basically Crash Bandicoot on speed (with the aborted Sonic Xtreme project sprinkled in). Also, youre not missing much by skipping the Sonic Storybook games or Boom. The storybook ganes are the most on-rails Sonic games ever (as in, Sonic is automatically moving without input from the player) and Sonic Boom is just plain BAD (and that's in spite of the fact that they nerfed Sonic's speed in it, ostensibly to make it more platformer/exploration friendly).

This video reminded me of a game with such "lazy" design called Gunworld (for Xbox One). Its a retro style platformer/shooter where you can't pause at ALL and the levels are very drawn out (with very few checkpoints), require very strict timing in jumps and the boss fights (which are total bullet sponges) are extremely tedious and go out of their way to overwhelm the player with lots of crap on-screen. It tried to capture of the feeling of playing an old game, but only managed to capture their worst qualities and without any of the fun due to its overreliance on these fake difficulty tricks. To paraphrase HideOfBeast from his famous minimalist playthrough of Mega Man X6 (which is a can of worms in itself), "(Gunworld) uses fake difficulty as an excuse to avoid the effort it takes to design a clever challenge. If you include it at all, the last thing this sort of gameplay should ever be is a crutch, and (Gunworld) uses it as goddamn life support. You don't need to stack artificial difficulty to make a hard game. There's plenty of shit out there that routinely kicks my ass just as much as (Gunworld). The difference between this and those is the fact that they're rewarding to better yourself at because there's quality to their design. When you get massacred in a properly intense game, you don't feel cheated, you feel the need to improve." Around the same time I got Gunworld, I also got Prince of Persia Classic (Xbox 360), and while that's undoubtedly hard as well (albiet still toned down from the original PC game), its day and night from Gunworld--its much more satisfying to play due to how well designed everything is. 90% of my deaths in it were a result of me being reckless instead of being patient and understanding how the Prince's physics/controls work and how the levels are built around them, which are actually sublimely designed and with clear intent (if a bit stiff).

This is such a great analysis of the game! While I do have some fun with it once I get into the games odd flow, I think the biggest problem with Bubsy's gameplay is that it has no real identity of it's own and lacks the polish and nuances of the characters it's riding the coattails of. Bubsy's design can be summed up as "Square peg meet round hole"--it's basically a Mario clone with Sonic's speed and Knuckles gliding shoehorned in, with combat that just doesn't mesh well with the speed of a Sonic type game, so it comes off as a frustrating and unpolished game (the Sega Genesis port of Zool had a similar issue, since the original Amiga game was NOT designed to be played as fast as he moves in that port). Michael Beryln really liked Sonic 1--he played it for a solid week straight and wrote a document about why he thought it was a great game so he could get his boss to greenlight the first Bubsy game--and kind of 'got' that the point of the game was that you had to play Sonic over and over again to get better at it so you could get into the games rhythm and learn the skills to beat each level faster. Yuji Naka designed Sonic 1 with the idea of encouraging the player to play over and over again to figure out how to get to the end as fast as possible while also rewarding players who experiment and explore off the beaten path. But as you pointed out, Berlyn misunderstood one fundamental thing about it--the reason that Sonic 1 worked is because the levels were (mostly) built around Sonic's abilities and the game didn't punish you too harshly if you screwed up thanks to the Ring system (Mario's power-up system works in a similar way). Bubsy meanwhile is totally unforgiving--it goes out of it's way to screw you over if you make ANY mistakes at all, because he has one hit point, will die almost as easily as NES Silver Surfer if he runs into virtually ANYTHING that isn't a power-up (that he dies from hitting a wall too fast is just sadistic) and has no reliable means of building up his defense (and not even the hard to find invincibility power-up can save you from all of these), and that includes if he falls too high from above without gliding. And as you pointed out, the game does a poor job of giving players feedback of what exactly they did wrong and expects them to learn purely thru trial and error. If Sonic or Mario tried that (or rather, relied entirely on it), it would have completely killed the flow of the gameplay and discouraged newcomers from improving. Bubsy's platforming DEMANDS that you play on defense at all times despite Bubsy's high speed and gliding. Imagine if Sonic 1s level design was entirely built like Marble or Labyrinth Zone or Metropolis Zone from Sonic 2--that sums up what Bubsy's all around design is like. Not only is it derivative, but average at best if not counterintuitive and exasperating to play unless you REALLY know the levels and how Bubsy's bizarre momentum and slope physics work in and out. But whereas Sonic is rewarding to better yourself at and is still consistently fun even when you slip up or have to deal with some level design dips, Bubsy is just straight up punishing in its all around design.

I enjoyed playing this game back then, and didnt notice any of that.

Nice video

far and away one of the most inspiring channels in developing my philosophy toward game design. I really want to make something that communicates large and complex emotions that i have felt in my life in a way that's not possible otherwise, and your videos have really helped me solidify how i want to do that. If i had the cash i'd be a patreon, keep up the good work!

... and if you are dead set on making a really broad story - then you better get ready to add a whole lot of buttons! (only half joking)

Games generally give the player small tactical choices, and let the player feel the consequences of those choices - success or failure is in the player's hands (on a moment to moment basis.) However, most games that I have tried (I like first person games specifically) don't give the same sense of investment in the overall narrative that they do in their moment to moment gameplay. All too often, these games with so called "stories" ask little or nothing from the player in terms of critical thinking and decision making as it relates to the narrative. Not only do they ask little to nothing - but they PROVIDE little to nothing in the way of actual choices, telling the player what they have to do, and then FORCING them to do it. To take Half Life 2 as an example, it feels like the other characters treat Gordon like a child - he is NOT included in any decision making process, he is simply told what to do and then has to go and do it. The world itself also comes across as restrictive and contrived since you always (conveniently) have exactly one path forward - you never have the opportunity (or the responsibility) to chart your own course. (To clarify, I'm not trying to say that Valve did a bad job, you have to do the best you can with the resources and technology that you have available - I am just trying to critique the experience from a player's perspective) When I played Portal however, this lack of agency felt much less oppressive - it doesn't seem unreasonable to try to escape the facility, so it doesn't feel weird that it's the only thing you can really do. When Glados told me to assume the "party escort submission position" - I was emotionally invested and stressed enough that I actually considered obeying (even though there is no way to actually choose that in the game) - but since I DIDN'T choose to do that - I didn't experience a moment of being prevented from doing what I chose, so the illusion of being in control of my actions remained. (One of the reasons I felt so emotionally invested was that I made it a personal point of pride to try and make it through as much of the game as possible without dying on my first try. Even though I did die a couple of times, I still felt invested in making it through with as few deaths as possible. The danger, as well as Glados's threats, felt very real in a sense - which made me feel like I was really in the situation to the point where Glados's empty promise actually sounded like it was worth considering) Stories Untold did not make enough of an impression on me to even finish it (I only played the first three episodes before I watched this video) - I didn't even care for them that much as individual episodes (just being told what to do over the radio by other people, again - where is the sense of personal responsibility?) - though the first episode might not have had that problem, it was a while ago when I played it. Thank you for making this video, I agree that Portal is one of the best narrative games ever made. I don't know why you don't seem to hear people say that more often.

this comedian has some very good takes on game design

The sound effects was most likely due to the PC speaker in case you didn't own an Adlib-compatible synth. The PC speaker was incredibly limited. In Cosmo's case, it's using two different sound devices sometimes with 2 different sets of speakers.

It’s a hostile alien planet. Of course, it's dangerous and operates on rules you don’t know. That’s the point.

I know this is an older video, but I've watched a few of yours at this point. I want to pop in and say I love your editing. The motiff of arguing with the "robot" is the only acceptable way to use that damn voice. You nake it very entertaining. It's truly creative on your part!

Dude. Not only was the video content top tier but that patreon plug was quality too.

Hey man just wanted to say I just found your channel looking for a review of Actual Sunlight. Absolutely loved both the points you made and the concept of explaining things to the uh...Controller head puppet guy? Anyway, loved that video, subbed, checking out your other stuff. Cheers!

It's nice to have an explanation for the "Sonic Cycle" of the past 15 years... where a Sonic game gets announced, the hype builds, people think they have it figured out, and then it ultimately disappoints everyone. Also I look forward to playing Sonic's Chili Dog Delivery

that intro goes so hard, man

Just wanted to comment the dialogue with joe flows immersively well

To make empathetic games is such a deliberate task. And they most be the hardest to test for too.

Coffee! My thoughts are empathy happens when player can identify with the conflict that the character experiences personally, and when the game character behaves in a way consistent with their world and choices. Without empathy, the narrative will just feel flat. It reminds me of why history classes felt so boring in school, they were just facts and not life stories.

I’m in love with joe

It's about challenging the skill that the player is building. It's such an obvious and simple rule but hearing it spoken so succinctly helps so much! I follow a good few game design youtubers but you are easily the best at giving practical advice that's easy to interpret and apply. Please don't stop making videos! You deserve to be up there with the big dev channels!

"Using the system without thinking is lazy design."

Love the robot character. Keep it up!

Spot on

I really like these short videos with no fillers

This is really applicable to designing boss encounters!

Wii play, not wii sports

“Say you have a game where you shoot enemies” “I have a game where I shoot enemies” Got me good. Thanks for the thought-provoking vid!

have you been through any recent game jam stuff?

goddd joe cracks me up. thanks for the video, and glad you liked the game! hopefully i’ll have more on the way soon 👀

I played the game, and it is really cool my highscore is 3 pictures, those sticks in the middle are really hard

These are the best!

Joe is hilarious. I like this idea, gonna have to check out this game!

*Entering whisper mode* doesn't change Jo's volume at all 🤣 Gave me a good laugh there! Enjoyed the analysis of the game! I love games like this that really speak through their mechanics. Very powerful when you can make the player experience something first hand, so many powerful moments in gaming because of that. I would say it is gaming's greatest strength. Maybe a video on that topic would be great! Only downside to the video is lack of in game recordings! But the mechanics are simple enough that it isn't hard to imagine. Other than that, another fantastic video!