Games and Interfaces: Dissolution of Hardware

Crossposted from the Game Culture Club tumblr

In the 12th session of the Game Culture Club we got together to discuss the topic of Games and Interfaces. Since it was a purposefully broad topic we had much to discuss and a lot of interesting points. Let’s try to break it down, shall we?

Definitions

For the purposes of this talk we ended up with the following definition for interface: “A device or system that provides information about the game state and/or gives the player a means to affect the game state”. Because a game is interactive it always needs such an interface. There’s no way to avoid the topic: There can be no game without interface.

With classic video games this seems obvious. The controller is the input side of the interface while monitor and speakers do the output. But this only looks at the hardware side of things. There’s also software involved. The parts of the code that interpret the controller signals or the graphics displayed. The latter includes both regular gameplay graphics and graphical interfaces like menus or HUDs.

If we look at board games like chess things gets simpler. There’s no software and so it seems to be clear: The board is both input and output hardware. The game state is represented by the size of the board and the position of the pieces. And these pieces are also the input since moving them changes the game state.

Things turn odd when talking about physical games/sports like soccer though. There’s no device or system involved. At least not at first glance. However the player’s own body becomes that interface. Granted the player is always involved in a game as he has to manipulate the hardware. Here however the body doubles as both playing-piece and interface.

Something the games industry has been busy with recently.

Motion Gaming

The trend of motion gaming from the accelerometers of the Wii to the Kinect cameras has clearly brought the human body back into the fold of the game interface. Even the Oculus Rift is doing this with its impressive headtracking capabilities.

As soon as you bring the body into the game physics becomes a part of the game rules. And physics is an incredibly fine-grained set of rules. There is an (almost infinite) level of complexity. Pool for example: The condition of the queue, it’s tip, the balls, the felt on the table, the size of the table, the way your arm moves and many factors more.

To counterbalance this physical games almost always have decidedly simple rules. Just put the rules of pool next to the rules of a board game like Chess or Settlers of Catan.

The simplicity helps counterbalance the complexity of the physical rules with the simple game rules. It becomes a game more about mastering the physical side of things than the game rules. It’s about knowing how to hit the ball and not about memorizing all the game details as World of Warcraft players tend to do.

Motion gaming that uses the body input (pushing the arm forward) to create a discrete result (raising a shield) usually fails. The input is very fine grained but the trigger for the effect is very coarse (on or off). This means that input and output don’t map well. There might be technological solutions for this problem but without assistance this just doesn’t seem to work.

Motion gaming has been working at realizing the invisible interface.

The disappearing interface

The argument being that immersion is best when there is no recognizable interface. Using your hands instead of gloves and pincers. This is a notion the group was split on but one I personally disagree with. It somehow builds on the assumption that an interface is an hindrance and that the user is always aware of his interaction with the machine.

Those of us that learned to drive a car should be clearly aware that this is not the case. When one starts to learn an interface there is a active engagement with the hardware. You need to steer, think about using the clutch, changing gears, using the various levers. However as you get more practice the interface seemingly disappears. There’s no conscious though process involved anymore. You want to go somewhere and you get there.

The same happens with any kind of interface or tool. As soon as you’ve reached a certain level of familiarity then it becomes an extension of yourself, rather than a seperate thing. The interface disappears through use.

The interface is not an hindrance, but a very useful tool built for certain interactions. Its simple nature (as compared to camera or accelerometer-based inputs) makes it especially suited for complex rulesets.

And this abstraction is also part of what makes the interaction itself fun.

- Martin

The Game Culture Club is a regular table in Karlsruhe, Germany. We meet up once a month to drink beer and talk about games.