Anticipating the quality of Starcraft 2

11-26-08

May the Blizzard fan-boy storm commence. Starcraft 2 is coming our way. We don’t know when but the holiday season 2009 seems a good guess. It’s almost 2 years after the first showing, characteristic of Blizzard, it’s the right time of year and the game seems quite polished today. Letting Blizzard add the final twinkle in the year to come.

South Korea and fans around the globe collectively shot their load as the first footage was revealed. Starcraft 2 looked great from the start and seems to hold true to the original. But is this really that odd? The game has been in production for what? 6 years? Anything less then a game of the year would be incompetent on Blizzards part.

So how do Blizzard ensure such quality in their products? Actually the secret isn’t very secret. It’s just not customary in the industry today. They take longer to make the games. That’s it. They don’t add more because they have time, oh no. They just take longer making the same features, and therefore make them a hell of a lot better.

Games aren’t movies, we don’t have a near perfect theoretical model for how to make them, neither in production nor result. And we certainly don’t have expensive rental of equipment and locations. What we do have is expensive personnel costs. But this is quite strange, games cost a lot of money to buy. They don’t cost a lot to make compared to movies. Why aren’t more publishers making games the slow and steady Blizzard way? Because we’re still not making any money of of merchandise. Which is odd since the merch that does exist is selling, and fast.

Basically, the industry has a lot to learn from Blizzard. And most of it isn’t about creating games, it’s about how to run a company and an interest. Games take time, therefore we must position them as long term developments and sales. Merchandising and expansions are a must. Just as longer development time with less features, we know it pays off. Just look at Blizzard.

Adding the fun 3 – cognitive models

11-24-08

Cognitive models are the basic blocks of understanding we use the deal with the world around us. Don’t worry, I’m about to explain just what that means.

When we look at something or hear something we try to understand what it is by summing up it’s parts. Using the smallest parts we already understand we match what we’re looking at to the part we understand, do they overlap? If not we use other parts until we find one that does. If we don’t have one then we think of a category of parts to put the new thing in and call that a part we understand.

Example: If we see a bicycle tire for the first time to try to understand what it is by matching it to things we already understand. If we know what a wheel is we’ll call the bicycle tire a wheel. If we don’t know that a tire is we might not be able to match it to anything and will therefore sum it up as well as we can: “a round metal and rubber thing”.

When we have a lot of there parts we’ll start to see that some things are made up from parts. For example a tree is made up from wood and leaves. And a car from metal, wheels and an engine. But to perceive these more complex things we can’t keep using the parts that they are made up.

This would demand to much of our perception, our minds would be overheated immediately. Human beings can keep 7 +- 2 (ranging from 5 to 9 depending on a range of factors) things in our awareness at any one time. This means that it’s possible to understand 7+-2 things at the same time. If you see a car and can only understand the parts, you’ll freeze up due to overloading before you get past the car door.

Cognitive models are a way for human beings to abstract things, give them a name and remove the unnecessary information that isn’t required to understand it. So I can add my wheel and engine and metal compartment parts together to form the model Car. I then place all the cars I see into that model and now I understand what cars are. At least until I see a completely different car.

Everything can be, and is, understood in this way. Try looking at something and looking at higher or lower layers of complexity.

Keyboard – buttons – plastic – rectangle shape.

Keyboard + computer part + writing interface + hand extension.

Pretty easy to understand huh? It gets a bit harder to think of things such as army maneuvers or Darwinian evolution as simple cognitive models but this is what makes humans work. Without cognitive models we would be very limited indeed. And we still are in some respects, to understand new things we compare them to already complex models. When they fully, or partly, overlap we categorize them together. But this means a lot of parts that don’t belong get added to the model. This is called prejudice and is a huge problem for humans, no matter how open minded they are.

Next up, I’ll explain how Raph Koster’s theory of fun explains what fun is by using cognitive models.

The Now Habit

11-24-08

I’m reading a book about how to overcome procrastination, the Now Habit, and it is leading me to profound and intriguing insights into myself. Why I procrastinate and how I work as a person. It’s an odd sensation but not an unpleasant one. So to any procrastinators out there I definitely recommend this book, it’s thin and a fast read.

Don’t think It’ll change your life though, it will just change your understanding of life. If you really want to be more productive instead read Getting Things Done and get a Remember The Milk account right away.

Adding the fun part 2

11-12-08

Our limited awareness

Everything around us is competing for our attention at all times. Things that are large, have bright colors and move quickly usually take up most of our attention. This is because we, as humans, can only perceive a set amount of things at a time. Basically, we only have a bit of attention and we fill it up really fast.

We know a lot more about attention then most people think, read up on cognitive psychology if your interested in more details. In short, attention is limited and has a set of rules for what is more important to be aware of. Most of these rules we learn as we grow (speeding cars will hurt you if they hit you) some are based on instincts (sharp or slithering animals are not to be trifled with).

Thankfully we have cognitive models to help use make the most of our attention.

What are cognitive models? I’ll get into that next.

 

Twitter

2010

JesperBylund.com remake

I redid jesperbylund.com, finally hosting it myself.

It includes my portfolio and blog and was designed to be an interactive information sheet about me and my work.


Since all design is iterative I can't be sure this first version will work as intended. Only testing will tell. But since it's based on cognitive processes it should be an interesting website to most visitors.

2009

Tele2.se remakes 09

Tele2.se was relaunched with a new design in Febuary of 09. The new design was created by Cordovan Digital and implemented into the CMS Reddot by myself, Jakob Neander and Tobias Lindman.

The black top was a redesign of the Business part of the site in the summer of 09. Designed once again by Cordovan Digital.

Shattered Alliance

This was my third year project at the University of Skovde. Together with a team of 18 third and fourth year students we designed and implemented everything from the engine up. We had planned a 8 player cooperative shooter with online ranking.

The game was bought by the University and was intended to be used for PR purposes at LAN parties.

Sadly, the engine development was delayed due to changing demands from the University and in the end lighting and core gameplay progression was never fully implemented.

The game was however a great success as in it's final stages it did support online ranking and up to 8 players cooperating over LAN. The University even hosted a compitition in which new students downloaded the games and ranked for most kills during a week. A price was awarded and over 200 students did compete.

2008

Dreamlords the Reawakening

Dreamlords the Reawakening was the follow up on the critical success Dreamlords. Dreamlords never had monetary success and to reboot the brand and still retain the community Lockpick Entertainment created Dreamlords the Reawakening which was something of a cross between a sequel and an extension.

The lore was the same but the game play was not.

Dreamlords the Reawakening was picked up by several publishers and published in three territories. It was commercially successful for about a year before the economic crisis hit us and bankrupted the company.

Dreamlords the Reawakening is still being developed by active community members and former devs.

Dreamlords

Dreamlords was the brain child of a group of student from the university of shoved. It was a unique mix of RTS gaming and web based long term strategy.

The game was released to critical success but we never broke even. Dreamlords also lost a number of developers as the profitability shrank at the same time as interest from other game developers grew.

Grim Breed

Grim Breed was my second year project at the University of Skovde. It was a RTS game designed to be simplistic but offer a unique UI that let players issue complex orders to troops with ease.

The game was severely hampered by an external pathfinding library that we found out to late was not up to the challenge of guiding such a large number of units. The game was a great success for the members of the team and is to this date one of the most successful game projects to come out of UoS.

who am I?

what do I do?

I'm just a really tall guy who happens to love to understand what people do and why.

I fell in love with what engages people early on and decided digital entertainment and products were the way of the future.

I work smart, not hard, to find the details that matter. And I love to see people feel my work without really percieving it.

IF you need this knowledge or the effects of it, I'd be happy to share it with you. Follow or contact me:

I design for interaction. No matter what the product or service.

And I make that interaction fun. Interaction and fun are closely connected, it's harder to create fun without interaction, most people just don't know why.

Ease of use and simplicity is a side effect of designing for interaction, and all my work echo this effect.

Jesper Bylund CV Download my CV

jesper bylund.com