Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
View All     RSS
October 2, 2014
arrowPress Releases
October 2, 2014
PR Newswire
View All
View All     Submit Event





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:


 
Using Big-Scale Touchscreens to Transform Local Multiplayer
by Alistair Aitcheson on 06/17/14 09:09:00 am   Featured Blogs

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.

 

My fascination with local multiplayer began out of accident. I was building the two-player mode for my iPad puzzle game, Greedy Bankers vs The World in 2011. To differentate the two players I split the game board in two, but forgot to put any kind of barrier between the sides. The result: players could reach across the board and steal from each other.

In fact, they enjoyed doing this so much I added a points bonus to every gem stolen this way, to encourage them to do it more often!

Stealing in Greedy Bankers vs The World

Pushing this kind of hugely social play has been a design goal of mine ever since, and was the driving force behind my next iOS game, Slamjet Stadium. The frequent physical contact between players meant there was constant personal interaction. The encouragement to invade each other's space made cheating okay. Most players ended up grabbing each other's arms out the way. Some even wrestled on the floor! Cheating in the physical space allowed unlimited creativity, and offered an opportunity for players to express the more devious sides of their personality. It was incredible to watch.

The experience was made possible by the iPad's 10-inch screen: large enough for two players to make meaningful gestural movements without feeling cramped. In 2014 there's a whole new range of tech that pushes these possibilities even further but - for now at least - it's been largely overlooked.

 

The large-scale touchscreen

Large-format touchscreens have been commercially available for the past year, fully supported by Windows 8. Since October I've been building a brand new party game on a 27-inch touchscreen All-in-One, and using a 23-inch touch monitor (connected via USB to a tablet) to demo it.

The game is called Tap Happy Sabotage, and is a culmination of the lessons I have learned from Greedy Bankers vs The World and Slamjet Stadium. You can get a feel for how it plays out in the trailer above.

There are two key benefits to having a touchscreen this large. First and foremost, you can fit considerably more players around the device. As a result, I made sure Tap Happy supports as many players as you can throw at it - technically up to 52 at once. 

Secondly, players get more space to move physically, and with more physicality comes more memorable moments and more fun for spectators. If Fingle is digital Twister for your fingers, then touch monitors enable digital Twister for the whole body.

From demoing the game at industry events I've been amazed by just how much energy you can get from four or more players. It only takes one person to start cheating for everyone else to follow suit. It only takes one moment of boistrousness for play to become a free-for-all, with all players setting aside notions of personal space in the name of fun.

A group of players at Indie Game Collective, London

Of course, a game that devolves into fisticuffs will not stay fun for long. Neither will a game sustain its momentum if smaller and weaker participants get barged out. Building Tap Happy has been a constant back-and-forth of public demos, lessons learned and revisions made. These are the lessons I hope to convey in this article.

 

Building a Big-Screen Party Game

The basic rules are as follows. Each player is assigned two picture cards. The first is your "target card" - tapping this in-game awards a player a point. The other is your "sabotage card" which offers the first opportunity for foul play - if anyone taps your sabotage card you'll lose all your points.

The startup screen, showing your cards

It's not uncommon for a winning player to see the rest of the players hunting down her sabotage card to keep her from victory! I try to make sure each round enables some kind of mean or underhand strategy, so that imaginative players can feel smart for spotting it.

Each round lasts roughly one to two minutes, with every second round being a major twist on play. In one round players must hold down three of their card at once to earn a point, creating an inevitable Twister-style bundle of arms. In another, a spiked ball bounces around the screen  and you must drag your card out of its path. Here players spot they can steal opponent's cards to fling into its way, or grab their friends' arms to stop them from dodging.

Grabbing an opponent's hands can prove advantageous

In designing these rounds the rules needed to be kept as simple as possbile, to make sure it was easy for new players to jump in and feel equally involved. Explaining each round in at most four words worked well, and those involving an action no more complex than "tap", "hold" or "drag" were most successful at maintaining flow.

Playtesting showed that it was important to keep this explanation visible at all times. Players usually talk to each other during down-time such as round intros, and won't always look at the screen until they hear the start whistle. 

In fact, the key skill in most rounds does not involve touching the screen at all. It's observation: the ability to pick out your card from a mash of similar-looking cards. That's a skill everyone can get, regardless of their age or experience with computer technology, and requires little explanation. This has made it easy to get a large group involved quickly, and is also a neat space-management tool. 

With so many arms play could swiftly become a stalemate if everyone's arms were always on-screen and no-one could see what was going on. By having frequent pauses in play, with the layout of the cards changing regularly, it forces players to take their hands off, giving everyone a view and a fresh shot at getting in.

A typical in-game screen. Can you spot the bee before I spot the paper plane?

 

All Hands on Deck!

Of course, between these convenient pauses, players' hands will be all over the screen; one of the design aims was to get every player using the full screen space. But with that in mind, it's important to take safety into consideration - you don't want players to feel like they're going to risk spraining a wrist! I'd learnt from previous games never to have a shared focal point in one place for too long.

The issue of focal points as seen in Greedy Bankers

An example of what I mean is in, Greedy Bankers vs The World. With the aforementioned stealing mechanic, every gem dragged from your opponent's side of the screen to your own doubled in value. So the most obvious way to protect your interests was to guard the centre of the screen. Unfortunately, some players would spend most of the game simply fighting each other over this one spot. If you added more competitors into this mix someone could easily get hurt.

In most rounds of Tap Happy Sabotage all cards will fall away after the first point is scored, so even if all the cards are in a localised spot they're not there for long enough to cause an issue. One round that required a lot of revision was the "Vote for the Winner" round, where the card that receives the most taps in five seconds gets a point.

In the early builds the cards would all be placed in centre-screen, but now they are evenly distributed across its breadth. While seven players furiously drumming on one part of the screen would be a recipe for injury, giving each player a different spot to reach for reduces the pressure on individual hands.

Showing how the card distributions have changed between versions

At demos I've made sure to keep an eye on which people get immersed and which people are reluctant. Fellow developer Alan Hazelden noticed at a recent demo that players would give up if they didn't score a point in the first couple of rounds. Since then the game's weighted so that anyone who's yet to score gets more of their cards on-screen. 

Just scoring that first point is enough for players to feel that they get the game and could be the champ, and are more likely to stick it out even if they're losing.

 

Hit the Road

Of course, with a game designed around obscure tech like this, how do you distribute it? I often get asked at demo events how many people own a touchscreen this size. The reality is that touch-based monitors and All-in-Ones are relatively niche at the time of writing.

I'm entirely confident that this will change in the years to come. After all, the touch interface is becoming cheaper and cheaper to add to hardware. It won't be long before it's added to monitors just because it can be, as is already the case with laptops.

Touch tables already exist and while they're an expensive luxury item right now, this is also likely to change as the technology gets cheaper. We might not be far from the return of the cocktail cabinet - arcade tables for pubs, clubs and bars. 

Even today there is huge potential for big-screen touch games in public spaces. Social play installations would be perfect at music festivals, for example, and big screens are already popping up in galleries, museums and libraries. It'll only take one forward-thinking local authority to use social play on their existing screens as a way for local communities to connect.

Testing out the game on an 88-inch display at Microsoft HQ

Lessons from big screens

Working on these devices has transformed my perspective as a developer. The design forcus is less about creating an experience out of intertwining mechanics, and more about communicating with the player - engineering and encouraging the party spirit, and making a space for players to bring their personalities with them. It's an example of games as a springboard for players to interpret their own way, rather than a challenge for a player to master.

Of course, having seven players scream, shout and jostle over virtual playing cards on a great big screen is always going to be hilarious. I'm delighted to have found hardware that lends itself so well to social play and can't wait to push the technology even further.

 

Tap Happy Sabotage is available free from the Windows Store from this link, and will continue to appear at games events over the coming year.


Related Jobs

Pocket Gems
Pocket Gems — San Francisco, California, United States
[10.01.14]

Associate Product Manager
Trendy Entertainment
Trendy Entertainment — Gainesville, Florida, United States
[10.01.14]

Technical Director
Trendy Entertainment
Trendy Entertainment — Gainesville, Florida, United States
[10.01.14]

Technical Director
Trendy Entertainment
Trendy Entertainment — Gainesville, Florida, United States
[10.01.14]

Technical Director






Comments


Ashley Blacquiere
profile image
Very cool. Thanks for sharing, Alistair.

Have you ever done any experimentation with directional audio? I'm thinking about your section at the end on installations; perhaps there are some interesting mechanics to be explored if you were to run the audio through a surround sound system?

Alistair Aitcheson
profile image
Cheers! Haven't thought about that yet, but that does sound like an awesome idea

Christoph Will
profile image
Very nice article. I was actually part of a student project a few years ago where we built a co-operative Tabletop Tower Defense game, you can check out a video about it here: http://hci.rwth-aachen.de/tabletoptowerdefence

We observed in our user-tests often that in between rounds but especially after the first, usually rather chaotic try-everything round players would divide up the screen space. The tabletop was so big and only reachable from three sides, it naturally was very difficult for most people to reach the opposing edge of where they were standing.
My guess would be that in similar sized tabletop co-operative games, dividing the screen space - and in our case also the physical parts of the game - will happen very often. Which is of course unfortunate, since it reduces co-operation: One of our goals was that players would "hand over" the towers to defend the lanes currently under heavy attack, but that barely ever happened. Players would always find strategies that would reduce their co-op by dividing up everything.
Maybe it was just a question of balance (after all: student project in a very limited timeframe), but I would encourage every developer with such a big tabletop and a cooperative game in mind to pay attention to the fact that people can avoid cooperation by dividing up the screen estate!

Alistair Aitcheson
profile image
Wow, that's a really interesting game! You raise a really good point there. In Tap Happy Sabotage I try to engineer collisions between players through the placement of the cards of the screen, or where they're asked to move them to. I expect that's probably harder in a cooperative game. Maybe if the interactive elements moved around the screen of their own accord players would have to move to follow them - perhaps that might be a solution?

(EDIT: of course, with the 3D printed game pieces that would probably be difficult - silly me!)

Christoph Will
profile image
Moving the pieces around on their own would be difficult, but not impossible (same comp. sci. chair even works on something like that: http://hci.rwth-aachen.de/madgets ).
But of course, we also made the conscious decision to use the tangible parts as the central part of the cooperative gameplay, which as described, unfortunately didn't work out.
One additional problem was also the difference in the tangibles: everyone wanted to use the cannon (because it is just the most fun to use), but instead of handing it over during gameplay, players would decide on one player who would use it for one full round :/

Rick Kolesar
profile image
Good read.

I worked on a small prototype game called Firefly for the Microsoft Surface (no, the large table like Surface) and it was really fun. For once, we didn't have to worry about screen real estate and worried more about how to get the people to interact and "bump" each other.

Alistair Aitcheson
profile image
Thanks very much :) Sounds like it would have been fun to develop for one of those! I remember we had one at my university when I was a student but I didn't find out until after I left. So frustrating!


none
 
Comment: