Out of Lives: Death in Games

A friend asked me a question today that really got me thinking about games and game design. His question was "Is it possible to make a serious game about suicide?". As a subject it's a pretty dark one, and one so rarely discussed publicly; there is still a certain taboo-ness about the subject, and this is relatively understandable. Historically, culturally and religiously it is often seen as wrong or a sin to remove oneself, although not universally. In some cultures, senicide or geronticide was common practice; this means that when the elderly or infirm were unable to care for themselves or the household, especially in times of famine and drought, they were either killed or would voluntarily remove themselves from the group in order to protect them and ensure their continued survival. It is a touchy subject in today's society, especially for those who have been through the horrific experience of losing someone they know and love to it.

Games don't often cover serious topics like this, and yet the subject of death is such a common theme and simple mechanic to extend gameplay or allow players to retry sections of the game they have not yet mastered. Ryan Kuo, in his article 'Loss of Death: Suicide in Videogames' uses the example of a level from Super Mario Bros. 2, the super difficult and often frenetic Japan-only release that at one stage has the player find a warp pipe that will lead them all the way back to the very first level. This area is inescapable and the player must choose between the pipe or jumping down a hole, an action the player knows will lead to death and restarting the level. They must choose which is more preferable, death or the effort and potential loss of further lives it would take to return to this point and select a path that doesn't lead the suicide warp pipe. For most it's a simple decision to make.

A simple decision to make (Source)

Do games trivialise death then? In a sense, yes, though not in any exploitative sense. Consequences are rarely doled out for death, often simply sending the player back to a checkpoint or the start of a level. In some titles the stakes are a little higher; Kayin's impossibly difficult platform title, I Wanna Be The Guy: The Movie: The Game forces the player to restart the whole game every time she dies. To add to this, the game is unforgiving and requires repetition and twitch movement skills to complete. It is impossible to complete on a first playthrough as pieces of the environment will fall, rise, move, drop, reveal hidden traps and become an enemy itself throughout various parts of the game. Without learning where these all are and what the correct path to take is it is impossible to get through and is extremely punishing. But is this just an extreme in the same vein? Death is no less trivial, simply more frustrating than in other games.

A familiar sight from I Wanna Be The Guy (Source)

Death is not so simple in all games though, in some it is more than just an inconvenience. Jesse Venbrux, creator of the Karoshi series of games, explores using death to advance the player in his game Karoshi: Suicide Salaryman. The game is a puzzle platformer, and the only way out of each level is to find a way to kill yourself via various methods, including jumping on spikes, electrocuting yourself, ricocheting bullets off surfaces so that they hit you and much more. As the game ramps up in difficulty the player finds herself expending more and more effort to die, something we know is not encouraged in most games and so a fairly counter-intuitive operation. This action shines a light on the culture of death and violence in videogames and how willing we are to accept virtual death. Of course, there is nothing wrong with this acceptance inherently; when it comes down to it virtual death is not real, it has no consequence outside of a game and this is part of the reason we enjoy games so much, they allow us to live out fantasies, dark or otherwise, without the pain, suffering and guilt of reality that prevent us from performing said actions day-to-day. There are many games that attempt to make death more meaningful, or at least a more terrifying prospect for the player, especially roguelike-likes such as DayZ, the Hardcore mode of Minecraft (which actually deletes the world when a player dies) and many others that use perma-death as an element of play.

Eeeeep! My house! (Source)

Inner Vision, a dialogue game by Sunil Rao is one of the few titles I have come across that actually attempts to deal with suicide. The is short and simple but places the player in the role of confidant to three suicidal people. The player must talk with them, listen and select meaningful responses in order to help them find reasons to live. Every Day the Same Dream from Molleindustria deals with drudgery, repetitiveness and suicide. The player repeats the same day over and over but is allowed to make small changes to become a new person, and suicide is one of these changes, but this character's death only ends that day's dream and returns the player to their bed to repeat the day over again. The death, or attempted suicide of the game's character tells you so much about him without lines and lines of exposition, hours of cutscenes and narrative setup. Everything we need to know about this man is told in virtual silence through his actions, OUR actions in the game. So suicide and death is not just a plot point or mechanic here but a part of this person's character and this game's story.

The end? Not for this dreamer (Source)

But game designers have to be careful about how they deal with sensitive topics such as this. Many will remember the controversy over Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 and its 'No Russian' level, where the player is tasked with going undercover with a group of terrorists in an airport and has the option to assist in killing innocent civilians. It is possible to skip this scene entirely as the developers knew it may cause some controversy, and it is also possible to complete without firing at a single civilian. The scene caused outcry with many and raised many questions about the role of videogames in society, their comparison to film and television and the effect of interactivity in comparison to passive forms of media. The scene was even discussed in the House of Commons in the UK and many were very upset  and disgusted that the game allowed the player to take on the role of a terrorist but treated intervention as failure. The AI of the civilians was also a harrowing sight for many, watching as these innocent people tried to protect themselves and their loved ones, dragging the injured or themselves to safety as they are fired upon. It was too much for many, and I won't be discussing the finer points of the argument about violence in video games simply because I think a lot of it has already been said. But what this controversy showed is that people still retain the idea that games are toys for children. Despite the ubiquity of games and gaming there is still a sense that games are for kids and anything of a more serious, violent or mature nature should be censored, removed and buried. One point that is often raised about interactive media is just that, the interactive nature. When watching a film or reading a book, even if the reader is cast as the character and drawn into believing they are taking on the role in the words they read or the images they see they are not truly taking on that role. In a game, they are. Perhaps then, as games become more realistic and blur the lines, especially so in terms of their aesthetic representation and its level of realism, we will become more able to accept and learn from scenarios like this. The scene, in my opinion, was not entirely crafted to cause controversy, although there seems to be an element of it there. It told a story, tied together a plot and did a lot to dive into the character of Makharov, the leader of the terrorist group, and what kind of enemy the player is facing. Could it have been done in another way? Sure. Would it have been as effective? I'm not so sure. The emotional bang a player experiences in this scene is one that many didn't realise they could feel, and the fact that the game caused players to feel strongly about something is a huge leap forward from the pure adrenaline-pump that early arcade games tried to foster with high-speed gameplay and quickly ramping difficulty levels. A game doesn't have to cause controversy to make you feel, and I don't think that aiming to be controversial is a good move either but I do think that a bold move such as this will always be controversial until society recognises the role and impact that videogames can and have had.

An opening shot from 'No Russian' (Source)

GDC used to hold a regular game design challenge and in 2010 the theme of that challenge was 'Real Life Perma-death'. The challenge was to explore the nature of death, not just in games but in real life and in the context of games. The winning entry, for example, was from Jenova Chen of thatgamecompany. His idea was 'Heavenville', a social networking game where players are able to 'buy stock' in dead people who's stock value is determined by the amount of Google search results their name produces and their relevance considering the time that has passed since their death. Stock would inevitable rise upon death and fall as a person became less valuable in terms of their Google popularity. Another example was Heather Kelley (Kokoromi) and Erin Robinson's (Wadjet Eye Games) idea 'Last Game and Testament', a scaveneger hunt that makes the creation and reading of a will a more interactive and personal experience. Instead of writing a will the soon-to-be-deceased puts barcodes on their earthly belongings and puts information about who the object is being bequeathed to and why into the game. At the will reading the deceased's loved ones gather, take out their smart devices and go on a scavenger hunt, scanning barcodes and guessing who they think the item is for. Once all votes are collected information about who each item belongs to and why is imparted by the deceased and a final item is bequeathed to the person who guesses most items owners correctly. Kim Swift (formerly Airtight Games and Valve) presented her idea, Karma. This game would be prescribed to a terminally ill patient and is designed to allow them to play through their grief. The player has an energy bar and must play through the last two months of the life of a terminally ill patient. The player goes through various settings, like the character's work, home and stay in the hospital towards the end. An energy bar would determine how many actions can be performed daily and the player has the option to assist people in their life; helping a co-worker fix a computer, talking to a neighbour or mowing their lawn. These tasks are envisioned as unique minigames, each raising the overall karma of the player. Every two weeks the setting changes and the energy bar reduces to mimic the effects of the illness. Finally, as the character lies in hospital, barely able to move they are tasked with tracing a smile with analogue sticks. This is difficult as energy is extremely low but the whole game is designed to nurture a person through the pain they must be experiencing and the hopelessness they feel. Swift wished to teach people that though their time may be short there is no reason they can't make an impact in people's lives and be a positive force in all the negativity they face. We all deal with our own mortality in different ways, some like to escape into games to deal with life and this idea sounds perfect for people who use games in such a way. Although these are hypothetical designs at an annual panel that will probably go no further than that it is still refreshing to see that things like this are being discussed, both in a tongue-in-cheek way and with a more serious, nurturing perspective too. These are the kinds of discussions we need to have and the kinds of games we need to design to push our medium forwards as a device for storytelling, immersion, learning and healing. Games are capable of all this and it is in the hands of game designers to explore their own lives and deaths, their worries and concerns. Interactive, immersive media is the perfect tool for introspection and exploration of the existential as the audience is no longer passively and vicariously experiencing these questions but actively involved in the outcome.

A comparison of the rising stock of Barack Obama

and Susan Boyle in HeavenVille (Source)

I'm running through a few ideas in my head at the moment based around the concept and trying to figure out how to present it. It's a tough one but with all the examples given, and the many more I didn't mention, I think it's something that game designers are just learning to toy with. These early stages are always the most difficult and perhaps people will be more willing to accept more serious topics in games as the generations that grew up killing everything on-screen become leaders and policy-makers and as we start to see more games released with themes of dealing with the emotional side of death. Now how to implement it...

LUUG 29: A Feast for the Senses

UPDATE: Space Unicorn's coverage of LUUG is live so head on over to the Tubes of You to check out what you missed.

LUUG, or the London Unity User Group is a mostly monthly meetup, featuring talks and discussions from indie developers and industry experts alike, all united by their love and use of Unity3D. Now being organised by Darrenlloyd Gent, a Senior Lecturer at the University of Greenwich, this months event took place at the University of Greenwich in one of their lecture rooms and featured 2 guest speakers, both with very different things to discuss, but more on that later. LUUG is a very exciting opportunity for current indies living in London and using the Unity engine, and it doesn't solely focus on games either. Any use of Unity is acceptable discussion matter and an open mic session at the end of the discussions, a 'Pitch & Putt' session an hour prior (where people are able to freely show their work to other attendees) and a drink at a local pub after all is said and done provide a perfect opportunity for discussion of your own work and ideas, along with a breeding ground of thought and intelligent discussion of Unity. It's a great place to network and even find projects and work, with most people taking the mic offering opportunities, at least at this particular event. If LUUG isn't on your radar as a London indie now's the time to turn that all around!

Is... is that what opportunity looks like? (Source)

The first talk was from Barnaby Smith, a Unity3D developer at Kwalee. His topic of discussion was some work that he'd been doing in his spare time on procedural rendering of planets and terrain in Unity. He talked about the various methods of generating noisemaps, the algorithms used and their benefits and shortfalls. One very interesting technique for noise generation is known as Fractional Brownian Motion, a technique that layers multiple frequencies of varying wavelengths, called Octaves, to create a line of random troughs and peaks, ideal for terrain generation.

There's a poop joke in there somewhere, I just know it! (Source 1 / Source 2)

Smith then had to solve the problem of mapping these new textures to objects. Standard mapping usually uses a rectangular texture that is wrapped around an object, not ideal when your goal is to create spherical bodies like planets as you run into problems with seams and polar distortion. Cube maps on the other hand deal with many of these problems for you. Smith decided to map his textures with a cube map and apply this to his planet object. Many of the mapping issues dealt with themselves as cube maps are designed to display reflections of the environment around an object, meaning seams and distortion are less likely to cause problems. Combining various techniques like the ones described, combined with vertex placement and the creation of an atmosphere using a noise map with alpha controlled by height makes Smith's planets look unbelievable and he can produce a wide array of results with the tools he has built. He wishes to work on more tools to create even more stunning environments, including erosion algorithms and climate generation and it all adds up to a very exciting bit of kit that can really take the hassle out of creating terrain and environments! He is also working to reduce the rendering times of the tools, as the tools render everything live within Unity. A 20 second render of three planet objects was demonstrated, ,which is a considerable achievement, but with optimisation Smith feels he can take this down even further. None of Smith's work is up on the asset store but he's quite open to discussion about his work and you can hit him up on Twitter if you're interested in his techniques and expertise. You can also find his slides from his LUUG talk with more detail and code snippets if you're interested in trying out some of the thing's he's discovered riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight aboooooooooooooooooooooout here.

Next up was Leonard Burton, a freelance Web Designer by trade but a VR enthusiast by night (a Batman-esque existence to be sure). His topic of discussion was VR in Unity and its potential going forward. He began with a brief history of VR, beginning with astral projection and spiritual journeys. These experiences, in a sense, are a kind of virtual reality; a spiritual and mental precursor to the technology driven VR under discussion here. The idea and feeling of being transported elsewhere is not new or recent and has been a human goal for a long time, proven in both our history of fiction & narrative and our longstanding interest and study of things like astral projection and hallucinogenic compounds. Later, in the last century, we begin to see technology evolve to accommodate VR. Stereoscopy and binaural sound are used as a spectacle, to enhance the immersion experienced by the senses and to dazzle and amaze. Later, technology is developed by the military for training and combat and, as it often does, this technology eventually trickled into the public sector. By the 1990s it had exploded and VR machines were in every arcade, with VR glasses the talk of the time. The technology still hadn't matured and was often viewed and designed for as little more than a spectacle or a show, with many VR applications featuring large amounts of movement and many even utilising hydraulics to move the player's chair. This high speed action and large amount of movement often resulted in people feeling ill and never really explored the things that really immerse a person in an experience.

"Woah, these space boobs are so real!" said nobody, ever (Source)

We are now at a stage where many of VRs past technical problems have ceased too plague us, or at least have become more manageable and affordable to resolve. With things like the Oculus Rift, Sony's Project Morpheus and the the newly announced ControlVR (which has a Kickstarter which you should totally go to right now and back because it looks fantastic), combined with the thriving indie community that is now able to get their hands on such devices, virtual reality experiences are now very possible and we can begin to explore a more personal space with it, a space someone is comfortable visiting in their own home, a more matured and deep experience. Burton views VR as a medium unto itself, and I fully agree. While the platform can and most definitely should be used to create games it can also do so much more in terms of interactive narrative and experience. Burton then discussed the Oculus guidelines for design and stated that some of them will lead to a better experience while others are rules perhaps made to be broken. As an example, a seated experience is suggested but this may not always be conducive to the experience. A group at Zurich University created a device that places the user flat on their stomach with arms outstretched and is able to tilt and roll. Combined with motors, fans and an Oculus Rift the user is able to feel like they are flying through a virtual world. Burton calls on designers to design for VR as now is the time to do it. He states that experiences should be designed for VR from the ground up, not ported later as this tends to be less convincing. He also believes that designers shouldn't shy away from problems or wait for others to solve them but should actively pursue them however they can. He also discusses the importance of 'presence' within VR, something that goes beyond immersion. One can feel immersed in a book or film but to feel present and to experience a world through ones own senses is a far greater feeling altogether.

Did someone say presents!? (Source)

Burton then discussed some interesting examples of the use of VR. Aldin Dynamics have created an Oculus experience called Trial of the Rift Drifter; the game puts the player in the role of a someone who is accused of using the Oculus Rift to travel between dimensions. The game is advanced and controlled by gestural movements; shaking or nodding one's head, looking away guiltily as one is asked questions. Sightline is a game developed as part of a VR game jam but is now finding it's footing on the internet and being turned into a much larger experience. The game revolves around using the player's line of sight and altering the environment when the player isn't looking. Paths that may have been broken will be fixed once one looks away and then returns their gaze back to it, an extremely intriguing concept. Burton urges all indie designers to break into VR and be a part of shaping its future, and I myself am currently looking into the financial viability of an Oculus dev kit and some hand and gestural tracking devices to develop some ideas. Leonard Burton can also be hit up on his Twitter if you're so inclined. Both talks were covered by my pals at Space Unicorn Productions (website pending), who will be taking on the duty of covering all the LUUGs from now on. Subscribe to their Youtube channel to keep updated with LUUG so you won't miss it, even if you can't attend. The information is invaluable and the speakers even give private interview after their talks to the Space Unicorn guys, so you're getting even more than LUUG attendees!

I have so many ideas floating around in my head now, if anyone has an Oculus they're giving away I will take the burden off your hands, and I will do it for free because I'm a real nice guy like that.

UPDATED: UK Tax Cuts for 'culturally British' Pantomime Dames

UPDATE: The UKIE has released a PDF (download) explaining the criteria that must be met in order for a game to apply for tax relief. Projects will be assessed with a cultural test and granted points based on the criteria, which include the amount of characters and the portion of the game set in the UK or an EEA country, whether or not a game's story is based on that of a British or other European story, the amount of work completed in the UK and whether or not the creators are usually UK based. This is good news as it means that companies can't just move to the UK and start applying to tax cuts and will hopefully allow British cultural games to shine through. The PDF also explains how the tax cuts will break down over a game's cost and which companies are eligible, including a note that abandoned projects will not have the relief affected.



That's - erm - that's games in Cockney rhyming slam... Pantomime Dames I mean...

"You what guv'na?!"

The European Commision (EC) today approved a tax relief plan for the British games industry that may see up to 25% in tax cuts for games that meet cultural criteria. There is little information as to what these criteria will be as of yet but they are sure to be discussed at the upcoming event hosted by the UKIE to discuss the impact and effects of the tax relief, announced two days ago. This event will be attended by "a senior government minister" as well as representatives of the industry and the UKIE. The tax relief is thought to affect 25% of games produced in the UK and will surely bolster an already thriving industry.


So is that the future of UK produced games? Desperately strong-arming British references in there for tax cuts? It's hard to say without seeing the criteria that's being conveniently skirted over in every press release and statement. At the same time, I don't want to be a cynic. I'm not particularly patriotic but having lived in England my whole life it is the culture I know and understand, a humour I get that much of the world doesn't, a certain British-ness in the way we are, in the way the characters we create are. My concern is that what we'll see is a rise in games that contain a bunch of British stereotypes, not for the purpose of amusement, satire or affectionate ribbing but simply for the sake of tax cuts.

Then again, maybe it's time time for a second go at this?

I don't just refer to comedic characters and references, in the vain of say Family Guy (I find this particular clip encompasses so many British-isms it's like art, Seth McFarlane gets it), but even more supposedly serious characters. I don't want every game to be set in jolly old London town and be surrounded by fruit sellers, buskers singing George Formby and chimney sweeps doing delightful jigs.

This... this actually looks okay

But I have faith in British developers, faith that they won't just be out to make a quick buck and they truly want to add to the British cultural lexicon. The UK has had a massive cultural impact on the world in the past, and not just because they went round taking over every country they step foot in. We are a nation with a strong identity and mixed culture and the media we produce is often uniquely British, but the world in recent years has started to pick up on not just our fashion but our media too, a thing that was often confined to out little island as the rest of the world "wouldn't get it".

What does it all mean?!

An immediate and obvious example of this is Ricky Gervais' hit show The Office, a show that took the world by storm and became more than just a cult hit, spawning various regional versions worldwide. This was a uniquely British show with uniquely British humour; the awkwardness of daily interactions, the polite, reserved way we tend to deal with situations, the fools we suffer so as not to be rude. All of this was blown a bit wide for comedic purposes in some cases but the show was often based on real events from the writer's lives. It made it feel real and like home for me, like I could meet these people at any pub in the country. There were stereotypes but the character's were genuine and it made them feel more like character quirks and flaws. Perhaps having British culture in the hands of British developers is the best thing for it then.

And seriously, GTA: London 2 you guys! GTA: London 2!