OneGameDad

I updated the UI so you know your current location and the number of "viewers" watching your stream. All in an effort to increase immersion and give a better sense of place. I've also added attached the updated game below. Otherwise it's available as usual through itch. live-from-the-bunker.zip

Hey @clyde good to see there's some cross-pollination between the Waypoint & Idle Thumbs communities. Enjoyed trying to squirt the passers-by with the bidet. Damn hard though.

Your art style is awesome. What are your inspirations? And what things will the player do to convince the city inhabitants? How will you fight alongside cyborgs? (Sorry if these questions are answered in the demo, I'm on a Macbook Air and can't play much.)

In our modern world we share everything, at least online. So why not share your secret lair with more than your bunker buddies. Take a tour through your bunker using the built in security system to show off how you'll survive the apocalypse in style! Prepping has never been so snazzy or social media friendly! Live from the Bunker is available here. Or download it from the attached file. This game was created for New Jam City, the Unofficial Waypoint Game Jam in 2017, using Twine. It's still a work in progress but is functional and completable. More features and storylines will be added in the future. Future features I'd like to add: Stream Chat functionality, Viewer Icon & Numbers, More Verbs & Events/Endings, Re-Designed Interface, and Sound/Spoken Dialogue. live-from-the-bunker.zip

This is only the second game I've ever made and I'm working in Twine. I'm trying to use Sugarcube to have more control and to avoid using jQuery. Nothing personal against jQuery I just don't want the added syntax. But what I'm trying to do is imitate some chat and email function, through simple clicks. Sugarcube is create because it has the Dialog API which can bring up a box. At the same time I want to display a chatbox similar to what's shown here: https://twinery.org/forum/discussion/6617/auto-scroll-group-chat-format But I'm unclear of how to implement that chat formatting into a dialog box, or if it's even possible. I'm trying to keep my game simple for this jam but I want to learn something and push myself to do more with my limited programming and design skills. My last game just used simple choices to direct the narrative but I wanted more interactivity this time. Any suggestions of how to implement those features would be most helpful and of course you'll get the credit for such.

Thanks, if I had the skills it would be. But I just made it with this: https://m.photofunia.com/effects/retro-wave

All the glorious cyberpunk technobabble that Jake hates.

Totally in. Can't wait to participate in my first wizard jam. This is the point where I reference a bird noise is it not?

That's an interesting way of looking at it @itsamoose. So my next question would be, do the rules need to be directly related or indirectly related? The example you gave: is directly related. Because rule 2 is affecting something in rule 1. I am assuming that all rules in a video game are either directly related or indirectly related because they're all within the game. Also, I think @juv3nal and @TychoCelchuuu were touching upon something else interesting - the player. How much are players an aspect that determines when emergent gameplay arises? My original question was about the game itself, the one created by the designer regardless of the player. But what I infer from their arguments is that there is no separation of the player and the game. The designer can never account for the state of the player and so whether the player is drunk, up really late/early, or doing something else to impose their own rules upon the game. So the game is never a "closed system" in the truest sense of the term because the player's input is always required.

Sorry for the confusion, when I said physical game I meant something played in real life like rugby. And of course there are always physical inputs to a video game, other than those few that play themselves... But you point about assuming there's multiplayer already belies your point about one system, pushing a button. Because you right there have two. Which gets back to my original question, what is the minimum number of systems required for emergent gameplay? If the only way to express yourself in the game you're proposing is by pressing the button then is there really any emergent gameplay, regardless of whether there is multiplayer? I do agree with you @juv3nal that there is more going on than what's coded or seen on screen. However for Diplomacy to work there has to be a means of communication, which itself is a system. A very loose system but one nevertheless. Without it would the game be possible?

@TychoCelchuuu no I don't think it's possible for a designer to account for every possibility. But if the only thing a player can do is press a button, as you posited, then there is no emergent gameplay. To jostle to be the first or maneuver as @juv3nal suggested implies there are additional systems such as movement, physics, gravity, etc. if we're talking purely about a video game. If it's a physical game of some sort that's another matter. And to be the first means there needs to be a tracking system of some sort or multiplayer, which takes the game beyond a single system. Again, as a physical game it's entirely possible to have a single system allow for emergent gameplay because of the inherent systems of life, i.e. gravity, movement, etc. But video games need that all to be constructed.

That's very reductive. Not to say you're wrong. However, isn't the idea that emergent implies going beyond the intent or plan of the designer? If there's a single button to press and you only win by pressing the button then there is no other intent. And yes I realize that Wikipedia includes two forms of emergent gameplay - intentional and unintentional. Wikipedia's description talks of giving tools to players to solve problems, which means if a player can only do one thing then there isn't emergent gameplay.

I think you hit the nail on the head with the rocket jump. Some interactions are designed to happen such as the aforementioned ball pushing a button. Whereas those that were not planned but evolved from experimentation such as the rocket jump may be the emergent gameplay/story. Of course with testing some of those things occur and then a designer can implement them in their game. So I guess the question should evolve to, when should something be considered emergent gameplay? Is it when the possibility exists but was not part of the designer's original intention? Or is it something else?

How many distinct systems would you say something like Breath of the Wild has? Or FarCry 2? Is it even a matter of distinct systems or ones that interact actively in a game. Such as AI and combat, or physics?

The talk of emergent gameplay and emergent stories from video games by the Thumbs, Ian Bogost, and plenty of others has got me wondering. What's the minimum number of systems a game needs to allow/create for emergent gameplay/stories? And for that matter, when is something merely a mechanic and something a system? If we take notably games like FarCry 2 or Breath of the Wild, how would you delineate between the various systems are work in them, if at all?