Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- companions_in_games [2009-01-26 11:59] – davegriffiths
+++ companions_in_games [2009-01-26 12:47] – davegriffiths
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 There are also examples of games which immerse the player in more complex social situations, involving groups working together, or squads fighting together.
+^ Game  ^ Game description ^ Attachment level ^
+| {{:pikmin.jpg?200}}[[wp>Pikmin]]|The player has to grow and use small creatures called pikmin to retrieve parts of a ship which has crashed, and rebuild it to escape the planet. There are types of pikmin which have different abilities. Up to 100 pikmin can be active at one time.|The focus of the game is to interact with your pikmin as they help you to solve problems and carry out tasks. The game works well due to the large quantity of individuals, which is a much more forgiving strategy than using a single companion. They are also designed to be obviously very alien (as they are part plant) so the player can accept any shortcomings as "natural" and more amusing than frustrating limitations in game technology|
+Breath of Fire III
+The Thing
+======Conclusions======
+Strategies used in increasing attachment to companions in games:
+  * The use of natural language is one of the quickest ways to annoy the user, and break any illusion of intelligence, so it's generally left out, or a language which you can't quite understand is used instead, but which still conveys basic levels of emotion.
+  * User investment in the design or construction of the agent increases a feeling of ownership, and therefore attachment - "My robot is the only one like it".
+  * Collective intelligence is generally more robust, and likely to resolve in useful emergent behaviour than relying on a single agent.
+  * Migration of companions has been tried in games, and was generally seen as a successful experiment, although yet to be fully realised.