Mysterious Cases on Indiegogo

Robert Sabuda is a paper engineer who designs pop-up books. He — with collaborators — is now running an Indiegogo campaign to put together three Mysterious Cases: boxes that come with clues, props, puzzles and locks. He was good enough to answer some questions for me:

Screen Shot 2016-06-09 at 10.46.40 PM

ES: The trailer and photos make these look really appealing and tactile — it looks like there’s a lot of physical manipulation of props to solve these puzzles. And I know you’re a pop-up book artist and have done a lot of past projects that involve manipulating a book in order to bring about, as your FAQ says, a “WOW” moment. What qualities in a pop-up most contribute to delivering that sense of wonder?

RS: I think what it really comes down is providing a sense of a wonder and magic.  We like to be surprised, and maybe even a bit fooled, when we’re unable to come up with answer to “how did THAT happen?”  Pop-up books and interactive experiences, like the Mysterious Cases, supply that in droves.  We want to wrestle a bit and be delighted by new discoveries and the magic of the moment.

Continue reading “Mysterious Cases on Indiegogo”

The Mary Jane of Tomorrow

mj_of_tomorrow.jpgFor IF Comp 2015, I offered as a prize to contribute a piece set in the same universe as the author’s game. Steph Cherrywell chose this prize for Brain Guzzlers from Beyond!, which was exciting, since I’d enjoyed Brain Guzzlers a lot; and also slightly daunting, since Steph obviously didn’t need any help in coming up with art or feelies. Originally I was going to write a short story, but as I replayed the game and reviewed transcripts, I was hit with an idea for something more interactive. The result is The Mary Jane of Tomorrow, a not-too-difficult parser puzzle game set a few months after the events of Brain Guzzlers. (Estimated play time roughly 45 minutes, give or take.)

In the tradition of fanfic, it focuses on the relationship between a couple of the characters in the original game, Mary Jane Minsky and Jenny Yoshida. In canon, their closeness is demonstrated in various ways but never given center stage.

Gameplay-wise, The Mary Jane of Tomorrow is about training a robot to demonstrate certain personality and knowledge traits. To do that, the game makes extensive use of procedural text, borrowing the text generation library and even some of the corpora I used for Annals of the Parrigues. After the fold, I’ll talk about Mary Jane as a procedural text project, but it’s spoilery, so you probably want to play it first if you think you might enjoy it.

Steph decided she wanted to share her prize with the public, so The Mary Jane of Tomorrow is now available to play — and she even very kindly made some cover art for it, to match up with the rest of her work.

The game’s been uploaded to the IF Archive; in the short term, there’s also a Dropbox link for it, which I’m hoping will hold up until the file moves out of Archive Pending.

Continue reading “The Mary Jane of Tomorrow”

Learning about Multiplayer Puzzle Design from Escape Rooms

I’m standing on a London street across from a scrap metal recycling establishment, in front of a door with no sign except a cryptic symbol. I’ve been told I will only be admitted if I press the buzzer at exactly the right time. A stranger asks me whether I’ve “had experiences like this” before.

I have, unless the stranger means “have you ever ridden the London Overground before this evening,” in which case the answer is no. We are a little outside my comfort zone there. But there are no Tube stops in this part of town.

Screen Shot 2016-06-02 at 6.00.03 PM

Time Run: the Lance of Longinus is a London escape room. There is an hour of gameplay, but if you count in brief and debrief time, it will take a good chunk of two hours to complete. We played with a team of four, which is the recommended number. They will let you play with three or five, but there were several of the puzzles that I think would have been just a bit more tricky to do with three (and fully impossible with two, so that’s fair enough). It was excellent fun; the team came out fairly psyched up and energized, and immediately talking about finding another escape room to do together.

I’d also say that, except for the travel to get to London in the first place, escape rooms turn out to fit my lifestyle surprisingly well: the gameplay itself is self-contained and memorable, it doesn’t take 60 hours to get a full experience, it doesn’t rely on reflexes I don’t have, and I’m less likely to get stuck than when playing a graphical adventure. No prep is required. It’s also a playful social experience with sufficient structure that you don’t need to Do Smalltalk, and enough adrenaline and excitement that you do build a sense of connection with the rest of your group. It doesn’t tend to involve the level of creativeness and emotional risk-taking that you see in storygaming, so it’s suitable to do with people you don’t yet know super-well, and it doesn’t require as much energy.

As with the previous escape game I played, it would be bad form to go into too much detail: a lot of the fun of an experience like this is in the discovery, and I won’t describe the puzzles or much about the format. But to speak very broadly, I felt that the individual puzzles in Longinus were a bit less difficult than in Enter the Oubliette, and the narrative frame less stressful. In Oubliette, you have to ask for hints when you’re ready for them; in Time Run, there’s a constant line open to a hint-giver who will nudge you along if you seem to be missing something, and we spent less time actively stuck. The “run” in Time Run doesn’t refer to any actual physical activity, but the game does keep up a pretty good pace, with new puzzle content reveals happening on a regular basis. Conversely, less of what you see in Time Run is there to help flesh out characters or develop the fiction of the surrounding world. None of this is a criticism of either Oubliette or Time Run — just a difference in flavor.

Perhaps in exchange for their non-central location, Time Run’s organizers have plenty of space at their disposal, and they make good use of it. The game uses some quite large-scale props, and a few puzzles that would be cramped in a smaller setting. The whole space, including the intro and exit rooms, has been imaginatively set-dressed, but in a way that doesn’t overload the team with red herrings. At the end, you get a score card for your team, and it’s printed on thick linen-finish stock with gold stamping. There are no actors in the escape rooms themselves, but there are several at intro and outro, and possibly more staff we didn’t see working levers behind the scenes while we played. The whole experience feels deluxe, which reflects the ticket prices, a few pounds more than average for a game of this type.

Multiple activities in the course of the game were adventure game-style puzzles that I have never seen executed in real life before. I won’t say what my favorite was, but I will say that when our team found it, there was a certain amount of incredulous, appreciative laughter that someone had *actually* built this setup.

I found this fascinating from a game design perspective. Escape rooms generally and Time Run in particular are very much multiplayer puzzle games, and we have so few of those in the IF space that it’s worth digging in for guidance wherever we can find that. Some thoughts, based on the grand total of two escape rooms I’ve done so far:

Continue reading “Learning about Multiplayer Puzzle Design from Escape Rooms”

End of May Link Assortment

Upcoming events

June 2-4, it’s Feral Vector in Hebden Bridge, Yorkshire. I will be there, talking about interactive narrative. Many other people will be there as well.

June 2, 7 PM, you can hear Matt Sheridan Smith talk about his game You Can’t See Any Such Thing in Brooklyn.

June 4, 1 PM, the SF Bay IF group meets.

June 14, 7 PM, the Oxford-London IF Meetup is meeting in London at the Failbetter headquarters to talk about IF and other media.

June 23, the Oxford Festival of the Arts includes some general game content and (at 7 PM) a panel with various Oxford-based indie games folks. Not specifically an IF event, but likely to include some interactive narrative components.

Upcoming Comps and Jams

Discworld Open Jam runs through July 28, and welcomes any works inspired by or set in Discworld.

June 18-25th, I’m running Bring Out Your Dead. Do you have a work-no-longer-in-progress that is gorgeously broken? Massively overambitious? Too niche to finish? Bring it, lay it on the pyre, let us gaze upon its face.

The rational explanation: good science looks at failures as well as successes. This is a chance to learn from one another’s quirky experiments and colorful failures, extremes of interaction that just didn’t work in practice, and other items that the IF community might find archaeologically interesting.

The emotional explanation: sometimes it feels like the hard drive is filling up with unfinished, unfinishable things, and it gets in the way. This is a chance at midsummer, before the height of comp season, to make a final use of those items and clear them out of the way, leaving mental space for the projects that are still viable.

Post-mortem comments and author notes are welcome, and so is checking out and commenting on other people’s work.

New Releases

Robin Johnson’s entertaining choice-parser hybrid Draculaland is now available as an app for Android.

Hadean Lands is coming to Steam, and will become available June 20. There is also DLC! Namely, a certificate in which you swear to solve the game without hints. I can’t decide whether this is genius or cruelty.

And this is not a new release, but Daniel Stelzer’s puzzle-rich Scroll Thief has received significant updates to puzzles. If you haven’t played it (and possibly if you have), now might be a good time to look.

Craft

Failbetter editor Olivia Wood gave a VideoBrains talk about sex writing in games and its pitfalls — with particular attention to Sunless Sea.

[ed. portion redacted.]

Elsewhere

IF author Caleb Wilson (Lime Ergot, Starry Seeksorrow, The Northnorth Passage, and others) has a short story coming out in this Swords v. Cthulhu anthology.

Bring Out Your Dead

BoyD

Bring Out Your Dead is an event I am running over solstice, June 18 to June 25th. It is not exactly a jam and certainly not a competition, but rather an opportunity to purge old experiments and share what was interesting about them. For purposes of organizational convenience, though, it’s being treated as an itch.io jam. Here’s the text I’ve written for it:

Bring Out Your Dead is an event for sharing dead WIPs and experiments that you don’t expect to finish, but that you’d like to show to someone anyway. It’s a chance to cleanse your hard drive, move on from old ideas, and salvage some learning from things that didn’t work out. It’s also an opportunity for your community to learn from your mistakes — which can be just as useful as learning from a success. Ambitious follies, bizarre experiments, toys, and notions that in retrospect never had a chance — all are welcome.

You are also welcome, and indeed encouraged, to provide some context about your work. What were you trying to achieve? What do you think is most or least successful about what you did? Why did you ultimately decide to abandon the project? Are there things you think others could learn from the project?

There is no ranking in this jam: it’s not about competition and judgments. However, discussion is welcome, especially if you find something in someone’s entry that sparks your imagination.

To participate, you need only contribute items at the itch.io jam page during the time the jam is live. You are welcome to put in things that are not typical IF, if you wish.

I am mentioning this in advance because I know some people have already started thinking about what they want to contribute, but you do not have to put any special effort in, and indeed the initial point was to minimize special effort.

Not All Choice Interfaces Are Alike

I tend to write here about choice-based games as though they were all the same kind of thing, but that’s a perspective that very much comes from a history with parser IF and a tendency to distinguish clicking from typing. And I will freely admit that a few years ago I was pretty obtuse myself about the differences between types of interface option.

In fact there are many kinds of input methods for communicating the player’s decisions in a story, and many possible or actual variants, some of which allow the player to type a keyword from a set list, or search from among hidden choices by typing, or perform parser-like commands by pushing menu buttons. Seen in this light, the parser is part of a continuum with other input methods, not uniquely distinct from them.

Much has already been written, of course, about controllers and input for games. See for instance Tracy Fullerton’s Game Design Workshop for a detailed discussion of control design in general. And people continue to experiment, as in this alt controller jam. However, most of these focus on non-text-based or non-narrative games.

Here I’m going to discuss several input methods for text-based and/or highly narrative-focused games according to the following metrics:

How much effort is it? How expressive is it? How ambiguous is it? How discoverable is it? How much pressure is there? How much is the player required to embody the actions of the protagonist? 

This is not the same as studying the verb set of the resulting games.

Continue reading “Not All Choice Interfaces Are Alike”