Sword Art Online: Hollow Fragment

A note to those who read the first sentence of this before – Sorry. I was trying to save it as a draft, and it posted instead.

Sword Art Online: Hollow Fragment is a recent game for the PlayStation Vita based off of a popular anime series, Sword Art Online (SAO). I admit, I am a fan of the show, and that may color my impressions a little.

Very quick overview of the game. It starts at the end of episode fourteen of the anime, and then branches into a totally different storyline. There are two parts, floor clearing and the hollow area. Floor clearing is a series of 25 dungeons that you have to clear to beat the game. This part is actually a direct insert of the previous SAO game Infinity Moment. The hollow area is an open world area where you engage in a side story with a new character, Philia. This part of the game is rather difficult, and is stylized for slightly higher leveled players.

It would be hard to give this game a genre, but it plays like a mock MMO. It is single player, but it allows nearby people to play together through adhoc multiplayer.

There is a lot to like about this game, but unfortunately, there is also a lot not to like.

I’ll start with the crappy stuff so I can end on a high note. There are four major issues that I see, although one might not matter for everyone. These are repetitiveness issues, not great translation, a grindy romance system, and a bit too much fan service for me.

The biggest one for most people is probably the translation. While you can easily understand what is said most of the time, changing their battle strategy can be a major pain. They talk in strange half sentences, and if can be hard to tell what exactly you are instructing the ally to do from now on. Most of the story is pretty good. While this isn’t a big deal for me – I find it kind of funny and endearing – it annoys many people. Bandai Namco certainly could have put more work towards this. It was clearly not written by a native English speaker.

Another thing is that it tends to be kind of repetitive. Again, this is something that does not bother me that much. The combat system is intuitive enough that although fights tend to play out rather similarly, it is still very fun. Still, the side quests you have to do are very repetitive, slogging against enemies can be monotonous, and you do level up very slowly.

The creators of this game implemented a romance system, but it is rather disappointing. It consists primarily of talking to people until you have a prompt, and then pressing right trigger. There is little benefit in completing it, but it allows you to reset your partners A.I., which is helpful in unlocking their outfits, and tuning them towards how you want them to act. This is my biggest annoyance with this game. You could honestly just watch t.v. for hours and spam the conversations with the R-trigger to eventually get the max relationship rank, but it seems a little much, even for added A.I. customization. However, It doesn’t take that long to get the fourth rank, which allows you to give them new armor, which can be really good.

My third problem, one that some people won’t mind, is the large amount of fan service implemented in the game. This honestly bugs me more than the translation and repetition, if only because it makes the game hard to play in public. During battles it isn’t that bad, but some of their costumes are very revealing (Sinon’s especially, which I think is because her character’s base personality has less potential for fan service, they gave her very scandalous bonus outfits). Additionally, the storyline is not the greatest. It is entertaining, but it is no Persona or Danganronpa.

However there are some really good things about the game as well. It’s actually kind of hard to explain why I like the game so much seeing all the problems in it. However, some big things are the combat system, the world design, and the little things.

The world is pretty nice looking. The floor-clearing route isn’t as beautiful as the hollow area, and that’s because it was ported from the prequel, and wasn’t heavily redone. The hollow area though is amazing. It has some beautiful scenery, and is really fun to explore. The open world design of the hollow area can be difficult to navigate, but that makes it feel like you’re exploring.

The combat system is really good. There are a variety of weapons for you to choose from, and numerous skills. The skills are divided into three categories. The few Passive skills, sword skills, and battle skills. Passive skills give a flat bonus all the time, but you can have only one active at once. Sword skills are special attacks you can make with a weapon that are unique to that weapon. The more you use that weapon the more skills you unlock. Battle skills generally function as temporary buffs or debuffs, while some have instant effects such as healing or restoring HP. Battle skills are unlocked through going through skill trees and learning sword skills, and as such you sometimes need to train a certain weapon to gain access to a powerful skill. You normally auto-attack, but there is a burst bar that allows you to make powerful, but standard, attacks. These attacks deal increased damage, and can be used to make effective combos with sword skills, but they do not gain special abilities like true sword skills. There is a risk system, which is increased by certain actions. The higher your risk the greater damage you take, and the slower your burst meter refills. Both allies and enemies gain the benefits and penalties of a risk score. There are many things that affect risk, but the major one is switching, which resets it among your group. However, you can only switch once about every thirty seconds to a minute, so sometimes it can be better to take the risk for a little while. This was a long paragraph because there is a ton to the combat, and there are things I didn’t even mention, partially because I haven’t mastered them yet, and partially because it’s over cluttered as it is.

There are lots of little things that make this game great, the added items, and what sort of events happen. What makes if feel like an MMO without other players. One thing that ties the game to the anime right away is a grayed out log-out button in your HUD. In the first episode of SAO they lose the ability to log out of the game, and you see that in this game. You start at level 100, having played through three-quarters of the game by the time you start. You can’t go back to those areas due to a glitch in the system. You have items that are shown in the anime, and you can get others. In the hollow area you can randomly run into high level bosses, just like in an actual MMO, and everywhere in the game you can run into another group of people training together fighting monsters. They might ask you for your help for a while, and you can lend it. This makes it feel sort of like a real MMO.

I honestly love this game. It might not be the greatest game I ever played, but it is one of the most unique. The mock MMO system works really well, and should be familiar to those who have played actual MMO’s online. Still, it is something total newbies can get into as well. I know, because I never really play online games. My computer isn’t good enough. The world is beautiful, and the characters and events are fun for fans of the series. It also has the potential for hundreds of hours of gameplay.

I would give this game an 8 out of 10. This is mostly because of the unique MMO-esque combat system, which as far as I know is only in this game. The game looses some points for the poor translations, and relatively lackluster story, but it’s gameplay is solid and enjoyable.

The Social Benefits of Gaming

A stereotypical young gamer sits alone in a dark room, staring at a computer. His hands furiously type on the keyboard, and he mumbles occasionally into his headset. Some may worry that this child has difficulty interacting with others, or making and keeping friends. These people would be, in almost all circumstances, wrong. While this person may not outwardly appear sociable, they are likely conversing with online friends, and may be strengthening bonds made with people in the real world.

Online games have the unique benefit of allowing you to gain friends in a rather different way. Because everyone you meet in the game shares at least one interest with you, the game itself, it is very easy to initiate a conversation with the other players. This, and continuing to play together allows trust to build up, and a friendship to form. Having played games with friends myself, I find that it is much more satisfying when you share your victory with another person. Data collected in a study led by Dr. Daniel Johnson of the Queensland University of Technology found that many younger gamers find their online friends to be easily comparable to their offline friends, and sometimes even better (Australia 6). Having friends who you have no physical contact with can actually be a relief. Because there is likely little to no overlap with the friends you met online and your real life friends, you can easily relieve stress, or vent some complaints about recent events without the fear of them coming back to you. People with introverted tendencies may feel more comfortable talking to a small group of people from the comfort of their home, rather than going to a large dance, or sporting event. Finally, online friends can be nice, reliable sources of advice, allowing for comfortable dialogue where you can get perspectives from people potentially hundreds of miles away.

Gamers maintain and build these relationships. Often when one of these online friendships begin to form, you place them on a friends list, or similar system. Later on this allows easy communication and the ability to work together further. The collaboration and quick decisions you make while playing a game with another person allows you to see how they think, and how they cover and assist you helps greatly to build a feeling of trust. A study printed in the American Psychology Association magazine mentioned that in addition to strengthening current bonds through playing with one another, it becomes easier to function socially in real life (Granic 73). I believe this is because the quick judgments of trust you have to make while gaming allow you to better judge the trustworthiness of people in reality.

Dr. Johnson’s team also found that as pre-existing friends (such as a friend you have in school) play games together, it strengthens their friendship. (Australia 6). Fighting a monster with someone, or working together as part of an assault team in an FPS, even if it is entirely fake, undeniably creates a bond between the members, often in the form of shared experiences, inside jokes, and the like. Planning for these missions requires a degree of teamwork and responsibility, and the collaboration allows for deeper understanding of your friends. Additionally, as previously mentioned, you often begin to trust them more, because of how they helped you during the session of play.

You can also play online games with friends hundreds of miles away, allowing you to maintain your relationship in ways few other things allow through constructive interactivity. A personal friend of mine regularly plays the popular MOBA League of Legends with friends he knew, but that moved to distant states. He plays very frequently, but also manages to balance his offline friends, clubs, and grades. He is far from dysfunctional. The study conducted by Dr. Johnson’s team also suggests that gamers as a whole have better attachment to school, a closer connection with their family, and more comfortable friendship than non-gamers (Australia 6).

The biggest dissenters of this idea point out that excessive gameplay will prevent social interaction, particularly through taking up time and preventing normal face to face interaction, and may eventually lead to depression or the like. This is true. The study led by Johnson previously also showed that excessive gamers show an increase in social dysfunction, and general mental health status, as well as some specific problems like anxiety and insomnia. However, it also found that non-gamers as a whole have the poorest mental health (Australia 5).  This negates the argument against moderate play, and the positive points given above would offset any negative effects obtained even in extreme play.

Given these examples, and the fact that non-gamers can suffer health issues, it is clear that gaming does not increase social isolation, with it actually encouraging and facilitating further interaction among friends, and potentially creating new bonds with other players they meet along the way. Next time you think of the teen sitting in front of a computer, apparently alone, remember that there is likely a whole different social environment they are immersed in, one not immediately visible to the outside observer.

Australia. Young and Well Cooperative Research Center. Videogames and Wellbeing. By Dr. Daniel Johnson, Associate Proffesor Christian Jones, Dr. Laura Scholes, and Michelle Colder Carras. N.p., 2013. Web. 15 Feb. 2014

Granic, Isabela, PhD, Adam Lobel, PhD, and Rutger C. M. E. Engels, PhD. “The Benefits of Playing Video Games.” American Psychologist 69 (2014): 66-78. Web. 16 Feb. 2014.

I wrote this as a persuasive essay for my A.P. Lang class, hence the long and developed writing. Thanks for reading!

Achievers: An In Depth Exploration

This will be backed up by my post on Bartle’s game types, which you should look at first. It’s here. I’ll be applying this type to both online and offline games, and looking at subdividing the large group of “Achiever”.

Achievers are characterized by wanting to be the best people in the game. Have the best equipment, the most expensive items, and be the person that always wins. However, there are differing ways of doing this, and differing final objectives.

The first type of Achiever I would like to qualify is the “Completionist.” This is the type of person who want to complete everything. Instead of having the best equipment, they want to have all the equipment. Not only do they want to win, but they want to complete all challenges that the game present. They need to get one-hundred percent on each game they play. This is generally much easier in offline games than online ones, and they may spend many hours painstakingly completing everything possible.

Then, I name the “Perfectionist.” This is the achiever that picks something to do, and becomes the very best at it. Whenever offered a skill upgrade, they will pick the thing that best amplifies what it is that they chose. This could be very specific, or more broad. For example, they could choose to be an ultimate weapon master, or to be the ultimate user of the +5 Sundering Axe of Life Drain. Online games are often popular with them, as they get to show off their prowess to others.

I also see the “Competitor,” which overlaps slightly with the one below. This person wants to play against other people and beat them. They generally prefer an actual challenge, as opposed to a quick win. This differs from some variations of the killer (Those looking for challenging fights) in that this need not be a direct battle. They could race or compete in a puzzle contest. This does have a tendency to swing towards some of the killers habits, though.

Lastly, there is the “Speedrunner.” This is close to the previous category, but with a very specific edge. These players want to do everything as fast as possible. Where a normal person might take an hour to do something, they find ways to do it in minutes. They often compete with other speedrunners, and may compare tactics and times. There is a large community of speedrunners online, mostly engaged in friendly, but also very intense, competition.

I feel that Bartle’s categories can be rather large sometimes, and have much room for subdivision.  Here there are four I clearly find, but there are probably other archtypes as well. Other groups, such as killers or explorers, may have more or less. Please, feel free to suggest other types you may have encountered in the comments section.

Roguelikes and Their Appeal

Roguelike games incorporate a very small genre, and are relatively unknown to many “casual” gamers. This is unfortunate, as many are quite enjoyable. They are small, quirky, and usually short games, that you either enjoy immensely, or hate with a passion.

 

A Very Brief History of Roguelikes

 

The term “roguelike” refers to the game “Rogue,” a small ASCII (American Standard Code for Information Exchange. It’s basically the keys of a keyboard, and not as complicated as it sounds. Go here for more information. ASCII here is used as a design type, easy to run on basic computers. Look at the picture below for an example.) based game which is the first of the genre. Several similar games came before it, but this was the one that pioneered it for the future. Now there are many roguelikes, and some have become very popular, albeit, generally among a specific crowd. The meaning of the term “roguelike” too, is sharply disputed, though most agree that it’s key factors are permanent death, and randomization.

 

Why They are Often Avoided

 

Roguelikes are often looked over because of there apparent simplicity, unnecessary complexity (I’ll explain in one second) and general bad graphics. In addition, few actually know what it is, because “Rouge” is such an old game. I introduced several of my friends to the genre recently, and they had never seen anything like it.

The games often appear to be ridiculously simple at first glance –

 

Screenshot of Rogue. It’s a lot more complicated than it looks to play.

However, there are many complex rules. You must play  close attention to your health, hunger, and items, and do not know what your items do until you try them out. This can be potentially dangerous, as any old flask you encounter may be a flask of incineration, rather bad to drink. For the rest of that game then, any flask that would have been the same color, staff that would have been made of the same wood, or scroll that with the same inscription will be renamed to what it does. However, this will be reset between games. If a pink potion is a potion of healing in your first game, it may still be a potion of incineration in the next. This, and the monsters becoming stronger faster than you level up, make this an extremely difficult game. The difficulty curve is very steep in roguelikes.

Many roguelikes have graphics similar to the one above (in the ASCII format) or have very grainy graphics, such as the picture below.

Screenshot of Dungeon Crawl – Stone Soup

 This may lead people with certain graphical standards to avoid most of these. It’s a shame, as they are missing on some rather enjoyable games.

 

 The Enjoyment Factor

 

These games are extremely difficult, but also very unique. This can lead the adventurous gamer to enjoy these immensely, but those who want to play it safe are better staying with whatever they had been playing before. There is also a great amount of luck involved, and a substantial amount of pleasurable torture (If you don’t know what I’m talking about, here’s my blog about that. It’s not one of my best ones, but it will give you an idea of what I mean.) I have played many, many, many, many rounds of roguelikes, but have never finished a game, always dying. Only about half the time is it even from monsters, other times I starve, or set myself on fire (Those flasks of incineration scare me so much.) or die in other ways that are my fault, but not totally, as I lacked the materials to save myself.

Where to Start –

If you are at all interested in what I had to say, here are some good places to start with roguelikes. Most of these you will have to download, but they are really small. All mentioned below are available for free, so give it a try.

 

Brogue, a nice and simple one, and a good introduction to roguelikes, can be found here.

 

Rogue, the original, can be found here.

 

Dungeon Crawl: Stone Soup, my favorite of the complicated ones, is available here. The tile version has the graphics shown above, while the console versions graphics are more similar to that of Rogue.

 

Nethack, another popular free roguelike, is available here. This is one that I have not played, and therefore can not recommend strongly.

 

There is a roguelike available for free on PSN mobile as well, Adventure Bar Labyrinth. It is free, and a rather nice game, albeit there are some things you have to get via in-game purchases (with real money.) This one is very different from the others, as the potions and scrolls you get are pre-identified (The staffs however, are not), there are some ways to get out of the dungeon while keeping your items (most, but not all, require paying real money, or finding extremely rare items) and a kitchen system that allows you to make recipes and gain bonuses for the dungeon.

 

 

Bartle’s Gaming Types

Some of what I’m saying today can be read in a strict academic format here. I will be applying my own spin on these things as well, and diving into them more at different points. I will also remove the references to MUD’s (Multi-User Dungeons/Multi-User Dimensions), as no-one plays those anymore. Few people even know what they are. If you do read the above article, associate the term MUD with MMORPG’s (Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games), the modern equivalent.

I will be explaining, and evaluating Bartle’s theory in my own words. There is a lot to this, and I will likely create several posts on this subject. At least one in depth for every type mentioned here, and probably more on practical uses or comparisons to other taxonomies. The four types mentioned there are “The Achiever,” “The Explorer,” “The Socializer,” and “The Killer.” They are by no means exclusive, and most people display varying amounts of each, with a primary tendency. Remember these were created with online games in mind, but most apply to single player ones as well (Socializer exempt, minus my working theory that I’ll explain in another post.)

First, there are the Achievers (Honestly, I find the suit of cards analogy Bartle uses stupid. It’s easier to think of them in these terms, so I’ll skip past it. If you really want it, read the article, but it’s usually easier to just explain in these terms.) Achievers are the people who want to truly succeed in the game, and be the very best (like no-one ever was). This could be expressed through point collecting, leveling up the character, or completing achievements. In games without points, levels, or achievements (Rare, but existant) they probably want to be the best at doing a specific thing. They work mostly the same in offline gameplay.

Next, the Explorers, my brethren (I classify myself as an Explorer primarily, with an even amount of Achiever and Socializer next. I tend the least towards Killer, and am generally benevolent towards all players). Explorers want to know everything about the game. They are the ones who figure out obscure glitches or cheat codes, and know the quickest route from obscure point A to obscure point B. They figure out innovative uses of mundane items, and advanced Explorers may even be seen as gurus by new players, or players looking for specific information. They mostly work the same in offline gameplay. Gurus could become mods on forums, or work with video game websites, or even write a blog to share their knowledge.

Then there are the Socializers. These people play to talk, and enjoy themselves. They see games as a way of expressing individuality. These people will come up and talk to you,  gossip about the game world, or talk about day to day life (Whether you want to listen may or may not matter). They are however, prime targets of the next category, particularly because they annoy them. Socializers, when playing offline games, will probably talk about them online, or to offline friends.

Finally, we have the Killers. They basically do what is described, but more generally “Act on people” This could theoretically be benevolent, but that is quite rare. They generally search to kill other players, particularly Socializers (They never shut their darn yappin’!) and Achievers (Whom they see as an appropriate challenge that they can usually defeat.) Offline, these people would gravitate towards fighting games, and becoming excellent at defeating the computer characters, or their friends.

I recently introduced this idea to my friends “Racewalkchamp,” “Myrkyl,” and “Depineapple.” I had them all take this basic quiz, (Fair warning; it’s rather slow) as to see what side they went towards. You can take as well, if you so choose. However, with a base grasp of the ideas here, you should be able to decide where you fall on your own (I declined that to them, making them take it before I explained it. I figured it would help avoid bias in the test.)

Myrkyl was evaluated as an Explorer, with Killer being his second highest score. He has become rather interested in the idea, and went on to read Bartle’s article. Depineapple was also an Explorer, with mid ties to Killer and Socializer, and a very low score in Achiever. He also expressed much interest in the idea. He was one of my greatest supporters upon creating this blog, but has never actually been able to read it.  Racewalkchamp, being rebellious, refused to take the test. I see him as an Explorer/Achiever, but I have never really played a game with him. He mostly ignored me and watched YouTube videos.

Reflecting upon this, I find it rather strange, as according to Bartle, Explorers are the rarest type, (Worth noting – there is no data backing this up, so I’m taking him straight on his word.) yet my friends were all Explorers. This set me thinking – Perhaps groups of friends tend towards the same gaming type. I have no information to back this up, however, so I will look more into it.

 Here is a full citation of Bartle’s article (Because citations are cool, and for the amount that I used this article, it’s truly deserved. Also, legality.).

Richard A. Bartle “Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players who suit MUDs.” Web. Accessed 12/10/13. http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm