The 2010 IGF Student Winners have been announced and 10 different titles landed in the spotlight. At the festival in March, the 10 will compete for an overall Best Student Game Prize, but to get to this point they definitely had to be special. We’ve dug through them all and contacted their developers in a series of interviews called The Future of Gaming. Because if anyone is going to take over the industry, it’s these bright minds.

Spectre is the story of a man, played from different points in his life. The catch is, you make the story as you go along, and piece together widely varied stories of different parts of his life. Depending on which nine paths you take, you will find a plethora of different endings. Each time you play, you’ll end up with a different experience. The game was created by a group of students from USC Interactive Media calling themselves Vaguely Spectacular. Here’s a copy of the email conversation we held.

DIYgamer: I finally had to cut myself off from choosing a new path after playing through the game several times. Great work on this game! Can you introduce yourselves and your positions on the project?

Jamie Antonisse: I’m Jamie Antonisse, and I’m a recently graduated Interactive Media MFA student from USC. I was creative director for Spectre: I led the team in our collaborative design process, and wrote the story for the game.

Sean Bouchard: My name is Sean Bouchard, and I helped Jamie with the design of the game. I’m a graduate student in Interactive Media at USC. I also did some of the programming, especially for the minigames.

Asher Vollmer: My name’s Asher Vollmer and I created the popsicle sticks and duct tape that hold the game together.

Jamie: Translation: Asher is our Lead Engineer.

DIYgamer: How did you all come together to work on this project? Did the school assign groups or were you able to choose who you wanted to work with?

Jamie: Spectre started out as a labor of love, totally outside of class. In the fall of 2008, Sean and I decided we wanted to try our hands at a narrative platformer, and decided to see if anyone we knew was interested. By sheer luck, we ended up with an extraordinarily talented team… and by involving everyone in the design we ended up with a passionate team as well. We’ve devoted almost every Sunday since to working on Spectre together.

DIYgamer: What other notable projects had you guys worked on before getting to this point?

Jamie: Well, “notable” is all relative… but I do feel proud of my work on two student projects, The Misadventures of PB Winterbottom and Hush. Hush was a small rhythm game I designed, coded and co-produced for a Serious Games contest, and it got some attention for doing things differently within its genre. For Winterbottom, which is about to get its release on XBLA, I was in a smaller role, doing story and some level design. The success of that project has been really inspirational, and has taught me a lot about how to get the most out of a student game team.

Asher: I got my start in game-making by working on Winterbottom with Jamie in high school. I’ve been fooling around with prototypes and knickknacks since then, but Spectre is easily the behemoth of the bunch.

DIYgamer: Where did the initial concept come from?

Sean: Jamie wanted to make a biographical game. He and I had already spent a lot of time experimenting with non-traditional ways to tell stories in games. When he put the team together for Spectre, we spent a lot more time brainstorming off-the-wall ideas. One thing we came back to several times is the movie “Forrest Gump”. We tried to figure out how you would tell that kind of story in a game, and Spectre is what we ended up with.

Jamie: In terms of the game’s themes and story, a lot of it was actually a combined, fictionalized elegy for some real people who’d made an impact on my life. I had lost my grandmother earlier that year, after a long battle with dementia. Before she really started to slip, she would love telling me these little stories from all across her life. Some of those memories were exciting, some sad, some hilarious, some confusing… and the variety of those moments served as a reminder of how expansive a life is until we try to distill it down into one coherent biography.

DIYgamer: What other games and developers helped inspire you guys along the way?

Jamie: The 2D platformer has been my favorite gaming genre ever since I was in elementary school. It’s a set of simple, established mechanics that can quickly open the player up to truly amazing worlds and stories. So we looked at platformers, from Mario 3 to Braid, to see what sorts of experiences can be evoked by falling, hopping, running and soaring through 2D worlds. We should also mention Passage, because it broke so many assumptions about what a small game could tackle. Just because you’re only playing for five minutes doesn’t mean the game can’t be “about” a seventy-year life… I’m not sure if this game could’ve been made without Passage.

DIYgamer: As a student team, what were the most difficult elements you still had to learn to create the finished product?

Jamie: You’re always learning on a project like this. One struggle we faced constantly was controls… because Spectre features controls that change as the character ages, it’s been tough to nail down controls that feel right… and a little change in the underlying mechanics had these domino effects, from level design to art. Getting an effective and organized workflow, that was also a struggle… I don’t think I really understood how important a clear pipeline was before this project, but when you need to make sure nine peoples’ art, code, sound and design get done simultaneously without wasted effort, you learn on your feet.

DIYgamer: In the game, you get 9 chances to tell your story. How did you decide on that number?

Jamie: I wish I could point to some master plan, but that number really came out of trial and error. We knew we wanted to limit the number of memories so that each game was a small, well-defined experience… in the end, eight memories didn’t give the players enough room to explore, and ten seemed like too many to fit into one session.

DIYgamer: What was the hardest element in making sure each path held a cohesive narrative, if still abstract?

Sean: Spectre is built around the idea of themes. When you play through the game, all the individual anecdotes share some element that unifies them, and makes them into a story. That’s the narrative theme, and that’s what determines the game’s ending. Theme can transcend time and place, and even character. It’s how we give a series of events some kind of larger meaning.

DIYgamer: I counted 54 different stories in the list at the title screen. What made you decide on that many, because if I’m not mistaken, with the number of memories in the game the combinations must add up to more than that? Were any ending scrapped in the process?

Jamie: Yeah, at one point we tried to figure out how many possible memory combinations there were, and ended up with some preposterously large number, running off the edge of the calculator. We would’ve been in trouble if we wanted an ending for each combination, but no, each end can be reached in at least ten different ways. Basically, the memories came first, with a rough idea of the different stories they were part of. Then we combed through them and found fifty-two overlapping themes. That was definitely more than I expected… I started with about twenty different threads in mind, but new patterns kept popping up. Believe it or not, though several ends were rewritten, none were scrapped.

DIYgamer: Do each of you have a favorite ending?

Sean: My favorite ending is called “Books”. I like the way the young lady hints at the structure of the game — telling stories, night after night — by referencing the Thousand and One Arabian Nights. It’s a deep and poignant analogy, but you might miss it if you aren’t paying attention.

Jamie: I’m going to cheat a little and say “Final”… that’s the ending you get after you’ve seen everything else. It was the very last thing we implemented (just got it working this month) so it has some special significance for me as a capstone for the project.

Asher: “Doll” and “Fortune.” One of them is depressing and the other is uplifting. And not in ways you would expect.

DIYgamer: What do you want players to take away from the game, after trying out their options with different storylines?

Sean: The take-away has always been that the story of a life — any life, even the most ordinary life — is too complicated and remarkable to be summed up in a single story. People aren’t simple. People are intricate.

DIYgamer: What parts of the game are you most proud of?

Sean: When we put the first version of Spectre together, we had the idea to organize all of the various memories into types, but we didn’t have any sort of organizing philosophy for them. But eventually we realized that memory is inexorably linked to emotion: strong emotion is what makes us remember one moment but not another, and we revisit that emotion every time we remember that moment. So we threw out everything we had already done, and started over, this time paying attention to the emotional content of the memories, and how that is reflected in the gameplay. That was a difficult decision, because we had already put so much work into the game. But the game is much better for it.

Asher: The game is so massive and cohesive that it’s hard to pick a single favorite moment in the game. I’m a big fan of our level select screen, though. That thing is gorgeous.

Jamie: I’m just proud that all these weird systems and ideas, from a database-narrative of glowing memories to a walk-through timeline, actually seemed to come together as a whole and resonate with people. We’ve gotten total strangers thanking us for making the game… making a positive impact on someone, enough to warrant thanks, that’s a pretty unbeatable feeling.

DIYgamer: What’s next for all of you?

Sean: Three members of the team are about to start our own thesis projects. That’s very exciting, and I hope that our games are as successful as Spectre has been.

Jamie: Right now I’m working with three other IMD graduates, Andre Clark, RJ Layton and John Brennan, in a venture called the Peanut Gallery. We should be releasing our first new project later this month. Keep an eye out for “The Pond!”

DIYgamer: Are you guys going to make it up to San Francisco for IGF?

Jamie: Oh, absolutely. The whole Vaguely Spectacular team’s going to be there.

DIYgamer: What advice would you give someone considering pursuing an education in game design?

Asher: Personally I think there’s nothing more valuable than actually throwing a game together. Either by yourself or with a group of friends—both can be fun experiences in their own way. And then, hey, you’ve got yourself a product you can show off and add to your portfolio. It shows that you have the discipline and eagerness that this industry thrives on.

DIYgamer: Is there anything else you’d like to add?

Jamie: San Dimas High School Football Rules? Oh, and we have the game available for anyone to download and play, free, at our site: www.spectregame.com. Any feedback you give us will help us make our new IGF version even better.

DIYgamer: Thanks again you guys. Good luck in the run for the Grand Prize.

Full Series: The Future of Gaming
*Ulitsa Dimitrova
*Puddle
*Devil’s Tuning Fork
*Boryokudan Rue
*Continuity
*Dreamside Maroon
*Igneous
*Paper Cakes
*Puzzle Bloom
*Spectre

Hey reader/commenter!

Notice anything new to the site? No? Well move those little balls embedded in your skull just a little ways north of this post and you should see a shiny new link on our site labeled: Forums. That’s right. Your favorite place to read about and discuss indie games has removed the middle man standing between you and the developers/other commenters.

Go on. Create an account and get to discussin’!

What? Is that not enough for you? You want more than complete and direct access to discussing your favorite indie games with the developers themselves? Fine… how about a kick ass contest where you could win a bunch of kick ass indie games complimented by a grand prize of a free Xbox 360 Arcade? If that sounds like a kick ass contest then continue reading below for the exact rules:

So first things first let’s get to the prizes. Here is, EXACTLY, what we are giving away to our lucky contest winners:

- 10 copies of Emberwind for the PC or Mac, courtesy of TimeTrap.
- 10 copies of Shattered Horizon via Steam for the PC, courtesy of Futuremark Games Studio.
- 10 copies of AaAaAA!!! – A Reckless Disregard for Gravity via Steam for PC, courtesy of Dejobaan Games.
- 10 copies of Machinarium for PC or Linux, courtesy of Amanita Design.
- Additional indie games that have yet to be announced.
- 1 Xbox 360 Arcade version complete with as many XBLIG/XBLA codes we can muster from some of our developer friends. (Provided we don’t have any developer friends, we’ll just send you a 1600 point card.)

Sound good? As stated above we have tons of prizes we are just dying to give away (with more planned to be announced later).

So, now I bet you’re wondering just how you can get in on this fine little contest we have running here. If you’re thinking you can just leave a comment here and you’ll be automatically entered you are WRONG. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. Do not bother commenting here unless you just have a specific question about the contest. You will not be included into the contest if you do that and will only infuriate me because I know… I know… you did not read this entire post.

Here’s how to enter:

1. Create a FREE account in our brand new forums located here. (Or just click the link at the top)
2. Proceed to talk and discuss all the merry little things you would on any given forum, preferably about indie games considering that’s our specialty. First one to enter the forum? Never fear, moderators are standing by to discuss everything with you so you don’t feel alone.
3. Upon hitting the 5 post mark you will be automatically entered into our random drawing for super-awesome prizes.
4. For every 5 posts there after you’ll earn an additional entry into the contest up to 20 entries (i.e. 100 posts).

Simple enough, but before you rush off to the forums, we do have a few… stipulations. Rules as you may term them.

Rules for entering contest:

- NO SPAM! So you think you’re clever huh and that you can just easily spam a hundred posts in 5 minutes? Think again. Spam and you’ll be instantly banned from the contest and the forum. We want meaningful posts that contribute to a conversation.
- Multiple accounts are a complete no-no. We have IP and email checkers running. We’ll know if you have more than a single account that’s attempting to enter the contest.
- This contest is open to U.S. and Canadian residents only. Sorry European/Asian/Oceanic folks, there are too many legal hurdles to cross when holding a multi-national competition. Feel free to join in on the conversation though!

The contest starts immediately and will end on March 31th at 11:59pm PST. (No this is not an April Fool’s joke!)

All winners will be contacted via the email provided when registering for an account. Winners have 24 hours to reply to the “Congratulations” email before another winner will be chosen instead.

Good luck!

The 2010 IGF Student Winners have been announced and 10 different titles landed in the spotlight. At the festival in March, the 10 will compete for an overall Best Student Game Prize, but to get to this point they definitely had to be special. We’ve dug through them all and contacted their developers in a series of interviews called The Future of Gaming. Because if anyone is going to take over the industry, it’s these bright minds.

The game Puzzle Bloom hit PAX last September as one of their notable choices, and it’s gone on to hit the student showcase at this year’s IGF.  It follows the tree spirit Canotila, as they jump from beast to beast, solving puzzles on industrialized islands in order to restore the natural order. Players must figure out how jump from beast to beast, dodge lasers and hit the right switches. You can play Puzzle Bloom at PuzzleBloom.com right now before checking out the interview.

DIYgamer: Can you introduce yourselves and your positions on the project?

Daniel Kromand: I was project manager on the project, but also did some of the QA along the way.

Carina Randløv: I was the game director.

DIY: How did you come together as a team to work on this project? Did the school assign groups or were you able to choose who you wanted to work with?

Daniel: Most of the group had worked together before in some constellation, but for this game we were assigned the team and then had to develop the concept and levels. The administration did this because our team is located quite far apart geographically, so it would be hard to get in touch with each other otherwise.

DIY: What other notable projects had you guys worked on before getting to this point?

Daniel: Some of us have been on similar productions with DADIU (our program) and a few have even been nominated at IGF previously. Otherwise Jess (the game designer) and I have worked on a cooperative shooter called Zombies! which had some success online.

Carina: I was the director of the game “The Windblown Adventure”, an earlier DADIU production.

DIY: Where did the initial concept come from?

Carina: We built the narrative on the top of the game design. In the beginning, [we] developed game design parallel to the narrative design/the storyline. And then it grew together, and became one. As in most DADIU productions, the idea develops as a team-decision rather than a one-person idea.

DIY: Before having the main character jump from creature to creature, had you discussed any other gameplay methods of getting the spirit around?

Daniel: In many ways I think it was the other way around: We wanted the player to jump from creature to creature and mind control them. This proved a bit too sinister a theme, however, and we invented a more friendly setting, i.e. the nature-saving spirit.

DIY: As a student team, what were the most difficult elements you still had to learn to create the finished product?

Daniel: The team had very little [experience] with Unity at the time and only 5 weeks from start to finish. So it was basically a constant evaluation of whether or not we had time to include the various elements we wanted to include.

Carina: We are all students, meaning we are all in a learning process, and we work with the teams we are asked to work with. That can be a challenge in itself. And at the same time, you are supposed to produce a great game, playable, funny, AND you should use this possibility to test things out, be innovative and also allow yourself to fail. That’s a complex circumstance.

DIY: On the game’s website, you have a section for donations and indicate new levels may be in the works. Have you been able to raise any money to continue working on the game?

Daniel: We haven’t really raised any money, but nevertheless are we working on a third level in our spare time. It is currently in an unpolished beta…

DIY: The game has solid graphics that other browser-based titles don’t always have. What made you decide to make the game in-browser rather than standalone?

Daniel: When we decided to go with the Unity engine a strong point was to be able to distribute the game easily. I mean, what’s the point of a student game if no one plays it? So we agreed that it would be better to use the web player rather than a standalone because third party executables are always a bit shady to run, right? I think it makes a psychological difference to run the game in your browser than if you run it from your desktop.

Carina: As you hint to in your question, it is something unusual in a browser-based game. We wanted to focus on having a visual interesting playing experience, even though it was made for the browser.

DIY: What other puzzle games helped inspire you while making this one?

Carina: Portal is a clear experience. Maybe not in terms of mechanics, but rather because it reinvigorated the puzzle genre.

DIY: What parts of the game are you most proud of?

Daniel: Continuing on the notion that the game should be easy to distribute, I think we were quite successful on the learning curve as well as the simple controls in the game. I tested the game on some subjects who had basically never played any games and still they would get around eventually.

Carina: That the game is playable for non-players, as well as more core players. And that it deals well without point-systems and only few GUI hints. Also the way it deals with dying in the game, I think.

DIY: What’s next for all of you?

Daniel: Some of the people in the group are still in school and might still be producing games for DADIU in the near future. Most of the tech people have been recruited by larger companies, while the rest of us are enjoying the recession and all the unpaid work we get to do. =D

Carina: I am right now developing a new game for the DADIU 2010 production.

DIY: Are you guys going to make it out to San Francisco for IGF?

Daniel: Jess (Uhre Rahbek, the game designer) and I will attend the show, so feel free to come by if you are there!

DIY: What advice would you give someone considering pursuing an education in game design?

Daniel: I think all projects still need to have a lot of polish. Even though we all try to pretend otherwise, I think there needs to be some edge or poignant visual art to stir the initial interest. This often means that art and tech people have to start meeting each other, so people should work on some cross-disciplinary connections.

DIY: Is there anything else you’d like to add?

Daniel: I hope to see you all in San Francisco.

Thanks again to the Puzzle Bloom team. You can play Puzzle Bloom at PuzzleBloom.com.

Full Series: The Future of Gaming
*Ulitsa Dimitrova
*Puddle
*Devil’s Tuning Fork
*Boryokudan Rue
*Continuity
*Dreamside Maroon
*Igneous
*Paper Cakes
*Puzzle Bloom
*Spectre

On One’s Own is a column about, you guessed it, independent gaming. The wayward wanderings of DIYGamer’s James Bishop might lead to probing art, gameplay, design, reception or a number of other aspects related to independent games. But you can rest assured that all things indie will be carefully considered on a weekly basis.

One thing that does not differentiate between your regular developers and the more independent developers is the limitation of resources. Regardless of the reasoning behind it, there will always be something that needs to be cut, refocused or rethought in order for a game to progress from idea to reality. Though it might seem like an entirely negative process, considering that it is by definition cutting back, it can lead to some interesting design decisions in order to compensate for lack of sufficient time, money or technology.

Many of the qualities that are often associated with indie games are simply remnants of a limited budget. Crude artwork, obscure music and simplistic control schemes have turned out to be qualifiers of indie games for just this reason. The lack of a big publisher or developer hinders the design process in the worst way: lack of available resources. Resources being broadly defined here as time, money and technology. To be fair, an indie developer consisting of, say, four students at Digipen have all the time in the world to make their game. Even so, they are still limited by the sheer amount of work ahead of them with such a small team.

In a way, this limitation becomes the inspiration for innovative thought. As an anecdotal example, it’s often claimed that back during the development of Silent Hill, the developers at Konami had wanted an open game world. However, the hardware at that time just could not handle rendering such an expansive environment; the technology just wasn’t there to realize their vision, regardless of how big a developer they were. Instead of eliminating an open world, they added a layer of fog to the mix. And so the foggy environment of Silent Hill has since been dreary and bleak due to limitations imposed on the original. It’s pretty much a series trademark by now.

So how is it that indie games continue to be produced, even on their much lower budget of limited time, limited money and the ever-present limits of technology? One look at the amount of sheer garbage in any given indie games section offers a pretty good answer. But a better question might be, how do indie games of such quality continue to be produced under these conditions? Braid, at least the Xbox 360 version, is sitting pretty at around 92% at GameRankings while the WiiWare version of World of Goo has a whopping 94%. Apparently, it’s not as if these so-called limitations have actually hindered them critically. At least not all of them. But it doesn’t answer the question of how.

To put it simply, indie games aren’t actually designed to be fantastic games. Instead, the majority of them seem to be designed to provide a distinct and unique experience in order to make up for that fact. The game is just a vehicle for the experience. Much like films or books are intended to convey experiences, games are only a means to an end. Arguably, almost all games tend to work toward this outcome rather than rely entirely on visuals or gameplay. Developers tend to strive to be more like the Steven Spielberg, as opposed to the Michael Bay, of the game-developing world.

Depending on what sphere of influence you are in, all of these limitations can either be a frustration or joy. Or a bit of both, as is the case for Fumito Ueda, the man behind Shadow of the Colossus and the cult-hit Ico. Speaking with Level, a games magazine, Ueda said, “If we don’t have any limit to work from, it becomes hard to make anything good out of an idea. But if we on the other hand have a very distinct technical limit it’s impossible to go beyond it. It will put the bar in a certain place without any way to raise it.”

On the flip side, many of those in the indie community see these sorts of limitations as more of a challenge or puzzle that needs solving in order to adequately and accurately convey whatever experience they intend. In an interview with Indiegames.com, Wan Hazmer, the guy behind Ballistic Wars and The Last Canopy, said, “The more limitations, the more creative one gets!” Designers are required to constantly rethink and rework things when they encounter an immovable limitation.

And it seems that many in the indie game community agree with him. A member of Kokoromi, what Wired refers to as a collective of experimental game designers, Damien Di Fede was quoted back in 2007 as stating that “[t]he hardest thing in the world is to decide what to do when someone says, ‘You can do anything.’” It’s the age-old problem of the blank page—where to start. Being given absolutes, as in you have to be finished in this amount of time or have to be able to fit it in 256 pixels, leads to creative design solutions. Don’t believe me? Just check out Jason Rohrer’s Passage.

Passage is and was Rohrer’s entry to the competition called “Gamma 256″. It fits in 256 pixels, can be played with an Xbox 360 controller, and has a 5 minute span of playtime before the game is considered ‘over’ and completed. It’s simple. There are not a lot of visual accolades that can be crammed in with the limitations imposed. And yet, people still thought an awful lot about his game and Ian Bogost, a rather prominent name in the field, even praised it outright in an article of his own.

“But James,” you might say, “what does this have to do with the majority of indie games out there and why should I care?” Well, theoretical reader, here’s why: indie games will lead the way in terms of original ideas and innovation. And it’s because of, you guessed it, the limitations they handle. Lack of huge payrolls might mean that there’s no massive backing for any project, but it also frees a developer to create games that may never have seen the light of day otherwise.

Jason Rohrer’s newest project, titled Sleep Is Death, is a two-player story-telling game that involves using one player as the actual player and setting the other up as a “game master” of sorts where they respond to all the text-based shenanigans of the first player. In order to pre-order the game, you just need a measly $9 or $14 if you purchase past the release date. Clearly, it’s not marketed like a regular videogame, so that takes some of the expenditure off, but there are still resources tied up in it and it does represent an investment. Even so, if the game is absolutely horrid and nobody understands it or how to play, it is only a drop in the proverbial bucket overall.

That is not to say that companies like Sony don’t have the capital to blow on these kinds of projects. They do and at times make the leap of faith to a place that isn’t a sure bet. (Heavy Rain, anyone?) But you have take into consideration the sheer amount of money spent on developing a AAA title in this day and age. Too Human, a AAA game that ended up being a massive disappointment in sales, cost over $60 million dollars to make. Part of the problem with Too Human was a lack of limitation. They even built their own engine after deciding that the Unreal Engine 3 was too confining for them.

Rohrer’s projects, on the other hand, are financed and developed on his own. The same goes for Wan Hazmer’s games. Being that their design team is composed of only a single person, themselves, they are allowed to set their own goals and only use as many resources as they care to expend. In a similar fashion, many iPhone applications have incredibly low production costs, sell for less than a dollar and finish it up by reaping major profits—even when they don’t sell all that well. This has also caused a massive influx of games that are, well, garbage. But that’s for another column.

What it comes down to is that companies like Sony are more concerned with ensuring that they will make money off any given venture. They want a game that sells. In fact, more than simply wanting a game that sells, they need a game that sells. Their investors demand it. Rohrer and Hazmer want a game that people will play and enjoy. Sure, there’s money involved, but it’s not the ultimate goal of either of them.

In short, they design to design. They approach it as a puzzle and, like Gregory House, enjoy the thrill of it. Basically, they are the kind of people who think inside the box. In this way, they seek to change the way we fundamentally approach gaming. Somewhat ironically, that’s why indie developers will continue to be the ones to push the boundaries. Not because they have unlimited resources or because they have access to all the best tools, people and public relations but because they have limited resources and tools.

As the day of the next Independent Games Festival draws nearer, the finalists prepare for an incredible experience at the Game Developers Conference in a little over a week. On the other hand, we at DIYgamer are still sifting through the list. Last year, we began a countdown to the Independent Games Festival. The way this works is easy: we simply select games at random from the lengthy (301 total) list of IGF submissions and discuss what they’re about and how they play. For this week’s column, I played through two very different puzzle-platformers, Time Fcuk and the adventure-oriented Umbrella Adventure: The Castle of Cake.

Before starting this I want to emphasize that this is only meant to give you my impressions and perhaps that extra kick to try out some of the IGF submissions, whether they be these or any of the other 301. I assure you, you will discover that there is something unique about each and every game. And hey, if you’re lucky, some of them (like these) are even playable for free! All right, without further ado, here are this week’s picks.

Time Fcuk? More Like Mind Fcuk!

Okay, I’m not going to lie: I was automatically intrigued by Team Fcuk’s effort because of its title. And honestly, the game did absolutely nothing but fuck with me and provide for some good old fashioned platforming fun. The controls are the basic arrow key and space bar controls we know and love. You’ll find quite a bit to like in this pixelated puzzle-platformer. What separates Time Fcuk as a game is a combination of two game mechanics: the first is the layering mechanic and the second is the ability to carry and move blocks. The earlier reminds me of another IGF entry I played through, Color Symphony, while the latter reminds me of Block Dude (here’s the remake of the classic originally from Brandon Sterner in full-color Flash), a game that was part of the puzzle pack my friends and I downloaded in high school and loaded up onto our graphing calculators–which, by the way, how awesome are graphing calculators?

To elaborate, though, the Color Symphony mechanic I’m talking about is the ability to change the color of the environment, which unveils new areas and gets you past certain obstacles. This same mechanic is used in Time Fcuk and is labeled “layering,” but it also makes use of another mechanic by allowing you to lift and move blocks. There are also portals, the ability to walk upside down in certain areas, a completely different gaming mode which encourages you to “Enter the Unknown”–which I’m pretty sure randomizes and provides some extremely challenging levels. On top of all of these features, you have the “Explore” and “Create” modes, one provides challenges of all sorts with leaderboard support and the other is a level editor. Needless to say, Time Fcuk packs a punch and contains a ton of content for those willing to make use of it. You can play it on Newgrounds right here.

“Its a game about perspective and viewing both sides of the story from afar, its a game about blocks, platforms, drinking, high school reunions and work time fun.Time Fcku is a “puzzle platformer” about finding logic in irrelevance, its a 1+1=2 formula that will ask more from you after you leave it alone, its a community experience about communication with people who you dont like.”

You can have an umbrella and eat your cake too.

Umbrella Adventure: The Castle of Cake is also a platformer. Whereas Time Fcuk relies heavily on the puzzle side, Umbrella Adventure draws more influence from adventure games, filled with humorous dialogue to match. The coolest aspect is that the game is completely hand-drawn and hand-animated so it looks fantastic. I still feel color would have helped, but the greyscale provides an intrigue of its own. In more ways than one, the game reminds me of The Misadventures of P.B. Winterbottom by the Odd Gentlemen, whose game originally started out as a student project and turned into an XBOX Live Arcade hit published by 2K. First, you’ve got an umbrella. Second, neither game is in color. Third, in P.B. Winterbottom you’re chasing after pies whereas in Umbrella Adventure you’re attempting to get your stolen cakes back. Don’t get me wrong, though, by no means am I calling it a ripoff off because they’re actually completely different games and contain different types of platforming with Umbrella Adventure acting much less puzzle-centric. The game is entirely free and ready for you to download at this location.

While I enjoyed Umbrella Adventure for the most part, I had a few issues with the game. For one thing, it seemed too hard. I’m always up for a challenge but there seemed to be a steep learning curve. The first two cakes took me just a few seconds to get to; the cakes that followed looked to be impossible to reach. I don’t know if this meant you would come back way later in the game perhaps equipped with a new skill but I felt the controls and objectives weren’t explained adequately enough for me to know exactly how to get to the cakes. A help/hint feature would radically help this game. Other than that, however, the stylistic appeal–with its excellently hand-drawn animations, wonderful acoustic guitarwork and note-worthy sound effects–is undeniable. This certainly puts HiVE on my radar for future titles.

“Unlock the secrets of the Forest, explore the highest and deepest reaches of the map, and travel across land, air and water to solve the mystery of the theft of over one hundred delicious cakes, through a world brought to life by rich atmosphere, immersive soundscapes and detailed visual effects, presented in greyscale widescreen.”

That’s it for the week of March 1st, 2010. We’re only a week away, DIYgamers. Long  live indie!

Why is it rare to come across a mediocre indie game? It’s not that they don’t exist, but few people talk about them. And thank god. There are enough games out there to play something new — and good — every day till the day I die, and I’d rather not waste my time on something that’s just OK.

So I’m not complaining about not having to read about games that aren’t bad, but aren’t as good as what’s already out there. But I am curious enough to think about it.

Because mediocrity is a problem in the rest of the game industry. This doesn’t surprise me like it used to. One of the many reasons to dislike EA is that they spend “two or three times as much on marketing and advertising as it does on developing a game.” And it shows. Just look at Dante’s Inferno. The game was hard to miss, and I’ll admit that its marketing campaign was delightful. But every time I read about the game, in the back of my mind I was thinking “that’s money that isn’t being spent on making a good game.” So I wasn’t surprised when reviews labeled the game average.

The game industry churns out dull, uninspired games by the boatload. At least Dante’s Inferno was new (well, old but distorted beyond recognition) territory for a game. The industry shovels out dozens of movie and TV tie-ins like the god-awful Avatar and clones of whatever game is popular at the moment. They’re designed by committee, pieced together from other whatever the current trend in gaming is with no clear voice or vision. How many first person shooters came out last year that used the cover mechanic, and how many God of War clones do we really need?

That’s not to say that major developers can’t make great games. I happily split my time between the small- and the big-time developers. But it’s far harder to judge a game from a major studio before it comes out. Whether the game is good or bad, the marketing team is going to be able to spin the early press however they want. Mainstream games have a way of letting me down in a way that’s rare for indie games. That’s why I wait for a demo, or a consensus of greatness or a personal recommendation from a friend before sacrifice $60 to a game. But I have no problem pre-ordering indie games. Well, indie games and Valve games.

I can pre-order from an indie developer because what I know about the game means something. They’re usually by one person or a small team that doesn’t change. I could order VVVVVV because I loved Terry Cavanagh’s earlier work, Judith and Don’t Look Back. All I knew about Blueberry Garden at the time of purchase was that it had won the Seamus McNally Grand Prize.

Think about Braid, Darwinia, World of Goo, Trine and Torchlight. They’re great games, obviously, but what I love about these games — what I love about indie games in general — is that they succeeded on their own merits. Braid and World of Goo won IGF awards. Trine and Torchlight spread through player recommendations. And Introversion, Darwinia‘s developer, had Kieron Gillen.

There’s nothing like IGF for mainstream games. The closest thing to a deliberative body for mainstream games is, what, Spike’s VGAs? That ceremony is a joke, even by game industry standards. On the other hand, most indie games that win competitions are a surprise, at least aside from the IGF where even the nominees get a fair amount of scrutiny. But at the dozens of other competitions, the winners are selected from relative unknowns. Who had heard of James Silva or Ska Studios before The Dishwasher: Dead Samurai won the first Dream-Build-Play competition?

The same goes for indie games that do well commercially. Torchlight, Trine and Castle Crashers did well without much of a marketing push. And the best-selling indie games on steam are pretty damn good.

Even when indie games market themselves successfully, that’s an indication the the game is worth buying. Unlike AAA developers, who have separate design and marketing departments, most indie developers are also the marketers. If you look at AaaaaAAaaaAAAaaAAAAaAAAAA!!! A Reckless Disregard for Gravity, the team responsible for the awesome press release is the same team responsible for the game. Dejobaan’s passion for the game shines through in the press release, and it shines through in the game. Silva’s second success came from a game with a similar marketing strategy: I MAED A GAM3 W1TH Z0MB1ES 1N IT!!!1. All Silva needed was that title and a song. 2D Boy put their faith in their fans when held a pay-what-you-want sale for World of Goo, and their faith was rewarded.

The games that don’t win awards? The ones that don’t seem worth talking about? The games that nobody pays for? Why would anybody talk about them. I don’t. I don’t talk about games on DIYGamer that I don’t want to play. That’s why you’ll never see me talking about a puzzle game or racing simulator. That’s also why you’ll never see me talking about platformers with middling controls or an adventure game with childish challenges. If I get bored of a game within the first half-hour of play, I’m not going to inflict that boredom on a reader.

And I think other games journalists feel the same way. So that’s why mediocre indie games don’t appear on many game blogs. And they don’t win awards because they’re not that good. And they don’t get bought because nobody’s going out of their way to tell their friends.

In the end, it’s better for the indie scene if its mediocre games live in obscurity.

What do you look for in your puzzle game? With the match-3 genre overcrowded as it is, those looking to create a title like Quantz certainly must keep this, along with a few other items, in mind.

The dilemma lies in bringing original components into the game while not disrupting the already tried-and-true addictive gameplay of the genre’s best. While there’s certainly more of a clear cut formula for success in the type, nowadays you need originality; something new to grab the audience’s eye.

With those thoughts, I went into reviewing Gamerizon’s title looking to answer two questions: What does Quantz bring to an already full table, and is it enough to stand out from the crowd?

Gameplay

In Quantz, you control a six-sided magnetic box covered in colored marbles. You can choose to play Strategy, Action or Puzzle mode; each have their own intricacies, but the goal is to match as many marbles of the same color together as possible to set off chain reactions for extra clearance and points. This is done by reacting to the marbles that are launched at the covered cube. The 3D aspect comes into play seamlessly, as you must rotate the cube in an effort to have the falling marbles land in their corresponding color clusters.

Speed counts, but if you’re in too big of a hurry when rotating the cube, the marbles will be thrown out of wack. Though gravity is centered to the cube, they can jump off and slip and all over the place. This immediately brought up memories of the frustrations that came with attempting to solve a Rubik’s Cube. Though let’s be honest, I’ve never thrown any physical iteration of this game out of my window before.

Fast mouse movements that cause the marbles to shuffle aren’t just a determent however. A well-timed shuffle can get you through the particular puzzle you’re on faster than if you stood pat with where the marbles started. Its a nice feature that can be completely controlled and implemented by the player where they see fit.

The controls only require you to use the mouse, which at first brings a certain acceptance of the ambiance of the game; that changes as you go further down the rabbit hole and realize that what’s going on in front of you demands your attention much more than the pretty space around it. Tend to it if you don’t want a giant puzzlely mess on your hands.

As is my problem with most match titles, the lower levels last a bit too long for my taste and naturally the game can become stale if it lacks the challenge. This can of course be remedied by getting right into the more challenging portions and modes of the game. It’s just a personal preference: I want the game to naturally guide me from easy to hard difficulties faster, but still seamlessly. After putting it that way it sounds more like a ridiculous demand. Still that’s coming from more of a casual perspective as I’ll be the first to tell you that most of the time I’m not a hardcore puzzle gamer.

Story

Your quest is to become the Quantz Oracle, and like most match-3 types, this portion of the game is of little importance in comparision to the gameplay and presentation.

Style

Though the gameplay components that make Quantz standout have already been mentioned, I’d simply be remiss to overlook the amount of effort put into the design that also provides a boost ahead of the competition. The title is extremely polished, it sheds the browser look many of its brethren wear in exchange for a much more encompassing experience.

The soundtrack is solid and non-intrusive, the effects are great and the overall look of the game is just so much better than you’ll typically see from others like it. It’s presentation alone will garner the love of many puzzler enthusiasts.

Everything Else

The variety of game modes, worlds and puzzles to solve all add up to hours and hours of content to play. More importantly, those hours are enjoyable be it in long or short sessions.

In the end your level of interest in the genre will dictate how long you play for, but be sure that whether you have a passing interest in the genre or are a hardcore thinker Quantz should grab your attention and not give it back for sometime.

Quantz is currently available on Steam and other major digital distribution platforms.

[The developer/publisher gave DIYgamer.com a copy of this game for review purposes.]

I remember in the beginning of January, Erik Brudvig of IGN wrote an article deeming XBOX Live Indie Games a “failed venture.” I didn’t agree. In fact, I was heated enough over the editorial to want to write a rebuttal. However, our own Peter Rambo beat me to it and probably did a much better job than I would have. Though there’s quite a bit in Rambo’s article that I agree with and even Erik’s had a valid point or two, my purpose in this article is not to challenge their arguments but rather to provide some ideas for Microsoft as to how to make the XBOX Live Indie Game platform better.

First off, let’s admit it. There’s quite a few holes in the system. Whether it be for the developers or gamers, we are all aware they exist. But personally, I love the XBLIG platform. Games such as Clover, I MAED A GAM3 W1TH Z0MB1ES 1N IT!!!1, Soul, Your Doodles are Bugged, the entire Arkedo Series, and so on would not have been possible on consoles had it not been for the XBLIG platform. Sure, you may get the  useless app or unplayable game from time to time, but just as Rambo pointed out in his editorial:

“It’s easy to look at all the crap that’s released for the platform and be discouraged, but that’s just because everything ends up in the same place. There’s plenty of bad games on Kongregate and Newgrounds, but it’s a lot easier to find the good on those distribution platforms because the people running things act as curators, separating the good from the bad.”

But the question remains: what can Microsoft do to make it better? Here’s a few ideas. I’m sure most of them are debatable but exploring the possibilities won’t kill us!

1. Make XBLIG titles playable offline. Why I have to be logged into my LIVE account to play games that I’ve paid for and downloaded is beyond me. It’s easy to dismiss this problem by acknowledging that Microsoft wants full control over the platform (as my DIYgamer cohorts pointed out); perhaps the assurance that gamers will keep paying for the service is what makes this so… Whatever the case may be, when I pay for an app on my iPhone/iPod Touch, I can use everything but its online components if I wish to stay offline. Most of the games on the XBLIG don’t even have online capabilities. Some have leaderboards and a few have online play (like Creed Arena) but these components aren’t essential to most indie games anyway. If you wish to play a game on LIVE, log onto LIVE. If you purchase something, it becomes your property. Your ability to utilize a purchase should not be restricted.

2. Promote the XBLIG platform better. I know you’ve heard this a lot. This one is mainly for the developers, who have a rough time getting downloads as it is. Sure, there’s the trial or demo that comes equipped with almost all of the indie games but this is simply not enough. Yes, there are the top rated, top downloaded, new arrivals categories and even an IGN picks category, but what about all the hidden gems we don’t get to play? Why doesn’t Microsoft keep us informed as to what’s coming out in the near future? They do this with XBLA. I don’t think anyone wants to view XBLIG as a cheap cash-in for Microsoft, but they certainly make it seem so.

3. Achievements anybody? Well, there’s a problem with this suggestion right off the bat. Developers can abuse this capability… how will the flashlight apps and games such as Dont B Nervous Talking 2 Girls distribute their achievement points?… But again as simply put by my DIYgamer cohorts in our podcast, why not add an extra step in the review process for achievements? I’m thinking scaling it from 0 to 100 points should do the community well. (Maybe at intervals of 25?) In any case, this would be quite the incentive for gamers who are on LIVE but refuse to utilize the indie games platform.

4. Encourage better box art. I know this is kind of a weird one because it also draws on the developers to put in some extra effort. But I figure if you’re putting effort into creating a game, then its box art should be suitable. If you simply take a look here and see the comparison of the best and worst box art for games, you can see that most of the successful titles fall into the “best box art” category. Why is this? Because people judge a book by its cover. It’s the same when purchasing mainstream games as well: when the cover art looks enticing then gamers are much more inclined to purchase and play the game. Am I wrong?

The XBLIG platform is still young and who knows where we’ll be a year or two from now. It has spawned some excellent titles but also some atrocious failures. Microsoft can make many adjustments that can easily aid the service in becoming stronger and better. For some reason, it chooses not to. But hey, the first step is admitting to a problem. I hope they listen to our demands. Long live indie!

For a while now, developers have been trying to port the mouse and keyboard-shortcut dependent RTS genre to consoles with limited success.

Armor Valley is another attempt to bring the genre to consoles.

Gameplay

Armor Valley blends flight combat and real time strategy where you command your forces from above in one of three aircraft. Though, command is probably the wrong term. The only decision you make for the ground units is when they should come into existence. After that, they do their own thing while you play nanny. What’s surprising is how compelling that is.

The goal of each mission is to get the disruptor unit into the enemy base, where it disables the shields you’re incapable of damaging. Two of the other units are for ground and air support, and the fourth unit is just a lone soldier, but they’re pretty important. The soldiers can capture turrets, and they can don a parachute for when they jump out of your aircraft.

Battles take place in valleys, with bases on either end. The only resource is credits, and they’re dispensed at regular rates by your superiors. My favorite thing about the way this happens is that the closer your aircraft is to the enemy base, the more credits you get. The game really rewards risky behavior, even more so because you can drop soldiers onto the enemy base for a bit of extra cash.

My personal strategy was to rush ahead and take out all of the enemy turrets. Then I’d capture the broken turrets with my soldiers and build up credits till I could summon a great force. Then the game becomes a protracted escort mission, because your units move slow, so very slow. Because offense is the best defense, I’d stay forward, destroying any units summoned by the other base, until my fuel ran out. Then I’d rush back to base to refuel and rearm.

The only way to lose a mission is to run out of ships. You start most missions with three, but you can buy more. I think you can also lose if the enemy gets a disruptor into your base, but that never happened to me so I can’t be sure of that.

Your biggest threat are missiles. They’re hard to avoid, and you only have two shots worth of chaff to disrupt them. But your missiles have longer range, so stay back and let loose. The other big threat is the other side’s aircraft. It’s got the same stuff you do, so it has machine guns, missiles, bombs and a few shots of chaff.

Eventually, you have three aircraft to choose from. The starting craft is a helicopter, the SilverHawk, and it’s the most fun. Largely because it can move left and right. The other two craft are jets, and they are a lot harder to control. I don’t play a lot of flight sims, so I had enough trouble controlling the SilverHawk. But that’s not the games fault.

The combat is quite a bit of fun, but I wish there were more variety to the missions. Each follows the same pattern, adding a few extra turrets and a slightly different layout, but with few major changes. For instance, the mission that introduces the concept of dropping soldiers on the enemy base for money reduces your usual cash stream, but that’s as different as they get.

Story

You lead a small Federation force against its adversaries. The Federation is out to protect the global peace, something they do with advanced weaponry. You’re a decorated pilot, commanding your side from one of three aircraft: the SilverHawk, Hellfire and Stormbolt. Each mission starts with a briefing, and you do have a reason for fighting the other side, but they’re pretty boilerplate. They’re serviceable but nothing that’ll blow your mind.

Style

This is one of the better looking 3D games on the Xbox Live Indie Games marketplace. It aims for realism and comes pretty close, at least as close as your average major developer could get on the last generation of consoles. You control the camera, so you can change your viewpoint depending on the situation. Switch to a first-person view for dog fights and looking from above to drop bombs.

I can’t comment on the sound, because the sound of missiles exploding crackles across my TV’s speaker, making them sound broken. It’s the worst sound I’ve ever heard. Now, my TV is a cheap house brand, so it could just be my TV, but it’s never made that sound before. So I played this with the volume down pretty low.

Everything Else

Armor Valley succeeds, more or less, by putting the commanding unit on the field and making controlling that unit a lot of fun. The strategy element isn’t very fleshed out, but the controls are complex enough already without adding additional commands. I’m looking forward to more from Protege Production.

[DIYgamer.com was provided with a copy of this game for review purposes. This in no way affected the outcome of the review.]

I ignored Miner: Dig Deep for a long time. This is largely because the few times I’d heard about it, it was branded a casual game. I’m not generally a fan of casual games; they’re usually puzzle games or simplified versions of better games or, god forbid, Facebook applications.

But while the casual moniker certainly applies here — you’re just digging, after all — there’s enough progression and reward for someone like me.

Gameplay

As the title suggests, Miner: Dig Deep is about digging. But it’s also about gathering the resources to buy nice things.

At the start of the game, you’re given a little money and some basic equipment. Just a small bag, a cheap lantern and a dull pickaxe. Beneath the shop is a mine with a few tunnels already dug, presumably by you.

Your job is to expand upon this early framework. The lantern illuminates the surrounding dirt, revealing the treasure stashed all over the map, but it runs on kerosene. As the fuel runs out, the light dims. With your pick you clear the dirt one square at a time. Clear a square that contains some resources, such as the copper or tin that dot the shallowest areas of the mine, and you stash the metal in his bag. When the bag is full, or your light runs out, it’s time to head back to the surface.

The shop buys your valuables and sells you new equipment. In addition to kerosene and better picks, lanterns and bags, it sells latters, elevators and any new equipment you discover. To unlock new equipment, you have to find the schematics hidden underground. Why they’re hidden underground is never clearly explained, but you need the new equipment to dig past certain obstacles.

There isn’t much that threatens you in the mines. There are no brain-sucking insects or psychopathic mole people out to get you. Of course, it’s still possible to screw up. Dig the dirt out from underneath a rock and the rock will fall. If you’re under the rock when it lands, you’re returned to the surface without any of the resources you’ve acquired. The same thing happens if you fall from too high a height or if you get yourself stuck in a hole and you can’t get out.

I’ve read that you can also trigger a cave-in by digging out too much dirt in one area, but I failed to do so. That’s largely because I’m a cautious, random miner. I dig in one direction until I’m bored, then backtrack to an elevator.

Because there are few threats, you’re not really working against anything. You’re free be in as little or as much of a rush as you like. I took the title literally and dug deeper whenever I could. After all, the deeper you dig, the more the resources you find are worth. So I left huge parts of the mine untouched. My girlfriend picked up the game after me, and she did the exact opposite, clearing as many resources from each level as she could before digging down.

Story

This game is the story of a miner and his quest to find the biggest gem in the world. And that’s about it.

Style

The utilitarian graphics don’t stand out, but they don’t detract from the game either; most of what you’ll see is a field of brown dirt anyway. But they had grown on me by the end of the game. And there are a few things that Miner: Dig Deep does well. For one, the lantern’s light is perfectly implemented. The light dims so slowly that it’s almost unnoticeable; there’s no moment when you think that it’s too dim. And there’s a short point right when the kerosene is about to run out that light illuminates enough to see resources but not enough to see if there is a rock above. It’s the only point where mining becomes truly risky.

The same can be said of the sound. You’ll hear the same clink of a pick diving into dirt thousands and thousands of times during the game, and it should get annoying. For many, I’m sure it does, but it never bothered me. And the people who live with me didn’t complain once. But the sound the miner makes when he finds a resource is one of joy, and I loved hearing that sound every time.

Everything Else

It’s hard to pin down the appeal of this kind of casual game. The casual genre. One, obviously, is that it drew both me and my girlfriend into the experience, turning us both into digging zombies. Another is the peaceful state I found myself in whenever playing, reinforced by the simple, unencumbered graphics and the repetitive sounds of the pick punctuated occasionally by a cry of joy whenever a resource is found. It sucked away hours of my time and I didn’t even notice.

[DIYgamer.com was not provided with a copy of Miner: Dig Deep for reviewing purposes. This, in no way, affected the outcome of the review. The game is available for 80 points in the Indie Games section of Xbox Live's marketplace.]