Join Reuben Covington and Dan Felder for the seventh episode of Re-Making Magic, the podcast about game design and custom magic cards.
"Join the dynamic designer duo as they explore one of the weirdest topics in game design and make up a whole new term just because they can. Seriously, what the heck is Cinematic Design? Listen and find out."
Maybe the best episode ever. I have no reason to be bias on the matter.
Seriously though, total shocker to see me in the spotlight today. I want to make a point of noting Dan's and Reuben's major contributions to my sets development behind the scenes as well as bravelion83. They have all taken a great chunk of time conferring with me and giving me feedback as well as helping me brainstorm as I've moved the set forward, and I couldn't be better off.
Also, it may be astounding to hear the my real name is not IcariiFA. It's also a perfect coincidence that you bring me up in the same episode you happen to reference Super Smash Brothers, since that's where my screen name comes from. I was a low level pro at the game (Brawl), playing regionally, and mained Pit from Kid Icarus. In the competitive gaming league I ran, my title was the Flaming Angel (FA) which is partially inspired by me playing Pit's Red costume.
And yes, I am approaching the phase where I will be playtesting the commons in my set. I am currently working on the second draft of them to take into cockatrice, and would love to have as many people as possible contribute.
My REAL name is Tyler. Feel free to hit me up as well, whether you want to talk about my sets endeavors, Magic stuff, or games in general.
Tyler Girvan (I'm almost a Fight Club Reference!)
Email: girvat01@gmail.com
Skype: DurianG4 (Virginia, Unites States. Some random suburb outside of Washington D.C
P.S. I hate Betrayal at the House on Hill. So dull. I can't stand games that are all fluff with meaningless decisions (even if I can respect folks who just want storytelling experiences. It's just not for me.)
As usual by now, I always learn something new listening to the conceptual episodes. A lot of what you said about cinematic design somehow reminded me of Dungeons and Dragons, by the way. But I also have a question: after listening to this episode I'm left wondering how the concept of cinematic design as you explain it here relates to the concept of top-down design used by MaRo when he talks about designs where you're trying to find the right mechanical representation of a given flavor (Theros, Innistrad). Are they the same concept with different names? Are they different but related? Are they two different and unrelated things, and if so what is the difference? It may be a really stupid question, and if so forgive me, but as I told many times by now, I have absolutely no background on game design except for MaRo's articles, blog and podcast, and now your podcast.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
As usual by now, I always learn something new listening to the conceptual episodes. A lot of what you said about cinematic design somehow reminded me of Dungeons and Dragons, by the way. But I also have a question: after listening to this episode I'm left wondering how the concept of cinematic design as you explain it here relates to the concept of top-down design used by MaRo when he talks about designs where you're trying to find the right mechanical representation of a given flavor (Theros, Innistrad). Are they the same concept with different names? Are they different but related? Are they two different and unrelated things, and if so what is the difference? It may be a really stupid question, and if so forgive me, but as I told many times by now, I have absolutely no background on game design except for MaRo's articles, blog and podcast, and now your podcast.
This is a great question, and I think we could have been more clear in the podcast.
Cinematic Design is specifically "designing a game in a way that evokes the experience of a story". To aid the feel of the story, it often paints a visual image in the player's head, like the Meteorite coming crashing down onto a monster's head. Dungeons and Dragons is a good-reference, because it's all about cinematic design. I've done a lot of work on RPGs, so it's great to hear someone spot that.
By the way, if you want to learn how to do level design for videogames, or a narrative designer, become a Dungeon Master. Tabletop RPGs (and LARPs for narrative design but not so much for level design) are basically the most powerful engines available to practice game design. It's like fruit fly science, you can generate 6 hours of content for testing every single week for a weekly game (easy to set up if you're in college especially). I'd credit a lot of my success in these areas to running a D&D game every week for about 4 years.
A related topic is "top-down design", as used extensively in Theros and Innistrad. Top-Down design has nothing to do with the end goal, it's all about the starting point. When you do Top-Down design, you're starting from the flavorful idea. "Let's make a card based on Superman" you say. Then you pick mechanics that evoke the feel of Superman. A good way to remember it is that you start from the top of the card (the name and art are the major flavor pieces) and then fill in the bottom (text box). When you do Bottom-Up design, you tend to start from a mechanical idea for what might go in the text box. "Let's make a common card that rewards you for playing instants and sorceries". Then you find a flavor that fits the ability.
Cinematic Design naturally uses a lot of Top-Down design in the process, but they are two very different things. Top-Down is about the design process, while Cinematic Design is about an aspect of the Design Goal.
Innistrad is very heavy on Cinematic Design, even more than Theros I believe. Maro is often talking about Cinematic Design. Cinematic Design is about creating an experience for the player beyond their normal life. It lets you feel like an awesome wizard, and practically see the scene playing out in front of you, even if you're not paying attention to it (which is why it's so weird when Remove Soul counters Soulless One). It's about bringing the story of the game to life, the way a movie lets you live vicariously through Luke Skywalker.
There just wasn't a term for it yet, so we made one.
I wonder if there's another term for this type of design that isn't "cinematic". I ask only because in my studies I have encountered many arguments that revolve around the relationship between literature, cinema, and games. In the world of academia (where terminology is king) "cinematic" can often carry a lot of unwanted baggage associated with it, and this is especially true of game studies. Of course this isn't trying to be an academic article or anything of the sort, but it's interesting to think about how "cinematic" in this case is being used for its association to story, where we could just have easily used a different storytelling medium like "theatrical design" or gone even more basic with "narrative design".
While I think the term has a nice ring to it, I would just caution from using cinematic as a synonym for story, as that term in particular has a lot of other connotations.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
I wonder if there's another term for this type of design that isn't "cinematic". I ask only because in my studies I have encountered many arguments that revolve around the relationship between literature, cinema, and games. In the world of academia (where terminology is king) "cinematic" can often carry a lot of unwanted baggage associated with it, and this is especially true of game studies. Of course this isn't trying to be an academic article or anything of the sort, but it's interesting to think about how "cinematic" in this case is being used for its association to story, where we could just have easily used a different storytelling medium like "theatrical design" or gone even more basic with "narrative design".
While I think the term has a nice ring to it, I would just caution from using cinematic as a synonym for story, as that term in particular has a lot of other connotations.
That's very true. When I first read the title and while I was listening, it was very hard for me to divorce the term "Cinematic Design" from meaning designing cinematic sequences for games as opposed to a flavor or narrative design. I think that may be it's most common usage within the game designing I've experienced.
Cinematic Design naturally uses a lot of Top-Down design in the process, but they are two very different things. Top-Down is about the design process, while Cinematic Design is about an aspect of the Design Goal.
This sentence perfectly summarizes the answer I was looking for. Thanks for the answer and keep up the good work!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016 DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for: "Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index.Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
I wonder if there's another term for this type of design that isn't "cinematic". I ask only because in my studies I have encountered many arguments that revolve around the relationship between literature, cinema, and games. In the world of academia (where terminology is king) "cinematic" can often carry a lot of unwanted baggage associated with it, and this is especially true of game studies. Of course this isn't trying to be an academic article or anything of the sort, but it's interesting to think about how "cinematic" in this case is being used for its association to story, where we could just have easily used a different storytelling medium like "theatrical design" or gone even more basic with "narrative design".
While I think the term has a nice ring to it, I would just caution from using cinematic as a synonym for story, as that term in particular has a lot of other connotations.
I agree that using it as a synonym for story would be wrong, but it's not intended to be a synonym for story. Cinematic Design is intended to evoke the experience being depicted, usually in a way that can be easily visualized. The emphasis on being able to SEE what the game is representing, is why we settled on Cinematic Design. If there's a better term to use, awesome. We struggled for hours to come up with a term that we felt worked.
Narrative Design is specifically about Stories, while Theatrical Design sounds even more niche than Cinematic. So, I don't think either of those terms works better. Doesn't mean there's not a better one out there though.
I wasn't really making suggestions so much as I was giving examples of how "cinematic design" comes off to people in related fields. For someone who's currently studying cinema and games, "cinematic design" sounds just as oddly niche as something weird like "book-ish design" or "TV-like design". To be fair, this is largely because the gaming industry has tried to use comparisons with cinema as a marketing thing for a long time, so the colloquial use of terms like "cinematic" have definitely shifted in the public eye (which is a whole other can of worms).
Forgive me for getting so hung up on what is somewhat of a minor point, but I feel like cinema is actually the least similar medium to magic and other physical games. Film, television, and electronic games (the most "cinematic" mediums) try to create story experiences through immersion of the senses, but physical games are more like books in that they try to create story experiences through immersion of the mind. A movie or game cinematic will use visual and audio design to guide viewer experience, but in a physical game or book players are creating their own visuals and sounds in their imagination. Like words on a page, game pieces are mental representations of objects, which in many ways are fundamentally different from the physical representations of objects you'd see on a movie screen.
I'm not sure any of this is helpful in actually finding a good term, but maybe I can at least illuminate my thoughts on this matter and get some discussion going.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
It's great to hear your comments. I think Cinema is the best reference to this aspect of game design theory, because Cinema is the most visual-focused narrative medium (as I'm sure you know, theater is mostly auditory and books are something else entirely). Additionally, we're referring to a "Cinematic" more than cinema-esque. A cinematic being, in the videgame industry, a short movie that plays between the action. In between game actions, short movies can play in your head that show the results of them - like a lightning bolt striking a merfolk. Evoking that is a major aspect of the theory.
The definition might be somewhat confusing to people focused on Cinema as a field of study, but ultimately it's the most specific word we could think of. If there's a better one, excellent. But at least it's more precise than the word "game" itself. Seriously, grab some popcorn and watch a bunch of people try to define the term "game" sometime in a comment thread for Gamasutra or some similar site. It's awesome.
But at least it's more precise than the word "game" itself. Seriously, grab some popcorn and watch a bunch of people try to define the term "game" sometime in a comment thread for Gamasutra or some similar site. It's awesome.
I've had to spend weeks reading the academic literature and writing papers on the history of this debate, so I think I'm good
I realize that the aim here was more for "cinematics" in videos games as opposed to film. Interestingly, as you all know, they're also called "cut-scenes", which has taken up a bit of a negative connotation in recent years because of it's occasional overuse in breaking up the flow of a game. (This is why it seems like, to me, marketing people always use "cinematic" and gamers always use "cut-scene", be it a conscious or subconscious decision.)
Personally, the flow of a magic game reminds me much more of a film than a cut-scene (trying to avoid "cinematic" here ). The story of the game I'm playing doesn't happen in between the game being played, it happens as the game is played. I think I may have been a little thrown off with references to stuff like Betrayal, a game that very much lives on a movie-type aesthetic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
The tricky part about using "Narrative Design" is that there are already Narrative Designers in the game industry and it already has a specific meaning in game design.
The story of the game I'm playing doesn't happen in between the game being played, it happens as the game is played.
I'm talking about in-between specific game actions in the post you're responding too. While you're considering your next move, the story isn't still going. It waits for your next move. We're both talking about the same thing here, it's just a tiny difference in how we're saying it.
The tricky part about using "Narrative Design" is that there are already Narrative Designers in the game industry and it already has a specific meaning in game design.
Is this not also true of "cinematic design"? In my experience, cinematic design also has a specific meaning in both film and games. This is why (for me) it sounds odd.
I'm talking about in-between specific game actions in the post you're responding too. While you're considering your next move, the story isn't still going. It waits for your next move. We're both talking about the same thing here, it's just a tiny difference in how we're saying it.
See, this point is a bit subjective because for me the story does continue between moves . I really do imagine the planeswalkers thinking out their next step, and what kinds of situations they would be in (holding out inside as their opponent's creatures batter at their door, or running through the woods as something chases them, trying to work through the next step in their plan).
That's beside the point though, what I'm really getting at is that the types of stories you talk about in the cast are IMO fundamentally different from both cinema as film and cinematics in video games. Cinematic design isn't a bad term, and anyone who hears it will sort of understand what it's getting at, but it's not really compatible with other areas of game design the same way most of our nomenclature is.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Considering the term is meant to evoke visual and immersive storytelling, I think choosing a term that works to talk about visual and immersive storytelling makes sense. If you can think of a more practical term, that's great, but I think you're being way too picky. The last game mechanic I saw didn't use a wrench or fix cars.
As for the "the story is still going between moves", this has gone from semantics to... I don't even know what. I'm pretty sure you know I'm talking about events, not suggesting that the scene in peoples' heads evoked by the gameplay spontaneously stops existing while a move is being made. The story doesn't move ahead in events without the game providing those events. If you pause a movie, the movie doesn't keep going. If you take a break in a magic game for pizza, the story hasn't changed by the time you get back. If you pause playing KOTOR, you can imagine all sorts of other things happening while the game's paused, but Bastilla is still in the same position when you get back. If you go to the land of make-believe and intentionally pretend that things have happened, fine, but you don't need a game for that. It isn't the story of a game, it's imagination-land that a game inspired. That's fine, but it's not a disagreement with what I'm saying.
Considering the term is meant to evoke visual and immersive storytelling, I think choosing a term that works to talk about visual and immersive storytelling makes sense. If you can think of a more practical term, that's great, but I think you're being way too picky. The last game mechanic I saw didn't use a wrench or fix cars.
This is fair, I'm just not a fan the same way you're not a fan of "narrative design"; I thought the term "cinematic design" was already in common use within the game industry (it is for me), so using it to refer to something different didn't make sense.
Going off of what .Rai said though, is there a reason this isn't just called immersive design? This seems to capture the exact meaning you're looking for (immersive storytelling) without any of the terminology snags. I also think a term like this puts the emphasis in the right place: the emotional experience, whereas cinematic design evokes visuals and audio in a way that really don't apply to Magic as a medium. (There are plenty of non-visual thinkers who may not picture things being acted out the same way you or I do.)
That's fine, but it's not a disagreement with what I'm saying.
I often find that the difference between a discussion and an argument is that not everything you say has to be a direct rebuttal to what someone else said. I was just trying to share a silly quirk of mine.
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
We're dealing with board games here, so cinematics aren't really that relevant (while narrative design can still apply to anyone writing a story in the context of analog gaming) Also, immersion wasn't quite what we were going for. It's a bit too broad. You can make a game that's highly immersive, but doesn't create that same sense of a visual story event. Go can be a highly immersive experience, but it's extremely abstract. It doesn't create that visual component. We like the idea of putting the focus like the player is seeing a cinematic in the middle of playing a board game.
Also, "Immersive Design" sounds - and rightly - like what a lot of people feel like they're already doing. Pretty much everyone wants their game to be immersive, just like every company wants to provide good customer service. Making the term more distinct helps separate the distinct points we're going for.
I think there's a difference between being engaged and being immersed. (Wow, super detailed semantic arguments? University has taught me well...)
I don't want to bog this discussion down more than we already have, but FWIW I think Go is engaging, not immersive. The difference between the two is, in my opinion, the trait of story telling you're looking for.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Taking the topic in a different direction (That is, blatant advertising) I've added the entire common card spoiler to my Serenta thread. The 100 card list shows what cards I intend to playtest for it's first round. Take a gander (the link is in my sig as well as the OP here) and if you're interested, hit me up:
IcariiFA
Tyler Girvan (I'm almost a Fight Club Reference!)
Email: girvat01@gmail.com
Skype: DurianG4 (Virginia, Unites States. Some random suburb outside of Washington D.C)
Disclaimer: I haven't ever ready any Magic literature.
I really like the term "cinematic design". I knew what it meant immediately upon reading it. I don't think "immersive design" is quite the same thing. Thinking back to the earliest days of Magic, I remember being immersed in a fantasy world (at times) while playing Beta-Alliances (especially during Legends). Yes, there was a sense of story telling in Ice Age-Alliances, but I never experienced cinematic design until Mirage/Tempest. Cinematic design comes under the umbrella of immersive design. A story may be able to be derived or extrapolated from any game with immersive elements (D&D) where the "plot points" are infrequent, subtle, and/or nonexistent. In a cinematically designed game, the "plot points" and "scenes" are frequent, blatant, and deliberate.
Disclaimer: I haven't ever ready any Magic literature.
I really like the term "cinematic design". I knew what it meant immediately upon reading it. I don't think "immersive design" is quite the same thing. Thinking back to the earliest days of Magic, I remember being immersed in a fantasy world (at times) while playing Beta-Alliances (especially during Legends). Yes, there was a sense of story telling in Ice Age-Alliances, but I never experienced cinematic design until Mirage/Tempest. Cinematic design comes under the umbrella of immersive design. A story may be able to be derived or extrapolated from any game with immersive elements (D&D) where the "plot points" are infrequent, subtle, and/or nonexistent. In a cinematically designed game, the "plot points" and "scenes" are frequent, blatant, and deliberate.
I think that this is a good analysis, though I'm curious as to how this relates to an overall design vs a card by card design. Is Innstrad's overall feel of fear a product of "cinematic" design, or just the specific cards?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In the beginning, MTG Salvation switched to a new forum format.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
It was at that moment that I realized: I'm kinda just making these things up. We can just write the rules the way we want them to work. People will have fun, and people will get it.
Disclaimer: I haven't ever ready any Magic literature.
I really like the term "cinematic design". I knew what it meant immediately upon reading it. I don't think "immersive design" is quite the same thing. Thinking back to the earliest days of Magic, I remember being immersed in a fantasy world (at times) while playing Beta-Alliances (especially during Legends). Yes, there was a sense of story telling in Ice Age-Alliances, but I never experienced cinematic design until Mirage/Tempest. Cinematic design comes under the umbrella of immersive design. A story may be able to be derived or extrapolated from any game with immersive elements (D&D) where the "plot points" are infrequent, subtle, and/or nonexistent. In a cinematically designed game, the "plot points" and "scenes" are frequent, blatant, and deliberate.
I think that this is a good analysis, though I'm curious as to how this relates to an overall design vs a card by card design. Is Innstrad's overall feel of fear a product of "cinematic" design, or just the specific cards?
We'll clarify some of these points in the next podcast. Basically, Cinematic Design is design is a design goal that aims to evoke the experience of being part of specific story events, to the point where you can easily visualize what's going on and it rings true (makes sense, feels correct, etc). There are a lot of elements that go into bringing the story to life. While individual cards that work well together to create clear story moments you can visualize, and avoid story glitches, is the backbone of the experience - other elements support this design goal.
Creating mechanics that evoke a feeling consistent with the story is important (and Innistrad does this beautifully). Additionally, a game's structure should naturally create a story structure that serves the themes (as mentioned in the podcast). Getting players to take physical actions that feel correct for the story events (like jabbing a button to punch and pulling a trigger to shoot in a videogame, instead of the other way around) also helps make the experience feel more genuine.
Cinematic Design is a specific design goal. It's a flexible one though, because you can layer it onto most other design goals. However, it's a powerful one as well - because whole games like Talisman, Betrayal at House on the Hill, Arkham Horror, Descent and a lot of other titles I could name prove that Cinematic Design can stand alone and be mega-popular in the process. I might not enjoy playing those games, but a lot of people clearly do.
And, when Cinematic Design is layered elegantly with other design goals, the results are mind-blowingly good. The X-Wing Miniatures Game is an excellent example.
"Join the dynamic designer duo as they explore one of the weirdest topics in game design and make up a whole new term just because they can. Seriously, what the heck is Cinematic Design? Listen and find out."
DIRECT DOWNLOAD
Podcast archive link
RSS feed
iTunes Channel
In this episode:
Contact details:
Reuben Covington
Twitter: @reubencovington
Email: reubencovington@gmail.com
MTGsalvation Account: Doombringer
Dan Felder
Email: minimallyexceptional@gmail.com
MTGsalvation Account: Stairc
Card Renders
Are you designing commons? Check out my primer on NWO.
Interested in making a custom set? Check out my Set skeleton and archetype primer.
I also write articles about getting started with custom card creation.
Go and PLAYTEST your designs, you will learn more in a single playtests than a dozen discussions.
My custom sets:
Dreamscape
Coins of Mercalis [COMPLETE]
Exodus of Zendikar - ON HOLD
Seriously though, total shocker to see me in the spotlight today. I want to make a point of noting Dan's and Reuben's major contributions to my sets development behind the scenes as well as bravelion83. They have all taken a great chunk of time conferring with me and giving me feedback as well as helping me brainstorm as I've moved the set forward, and I couldn't be better off.
Also, it may be astounding to hear the my real name is not IcariiFA. It's also a perfect coincidence that you bring me up in the same episode you happen to reference Super Smash Brothers, since that's where my screen name comes from. I was a low level pro at the game (Brawl), playing regionally, and mained Pit from Kid Icarus. In the competitive gaming league I ran, my title was the Flaming Angel (FA) which is partially inspired by me playing Pit's Red costume.
And yes, I am approaching the phase where I will be playtesting the commons in my set. I am currently working on the second draft of them to take into cockatrice, and would love to have as many people as possible contribute.
My REAL name is Tyler. Feel free to hit me up as well, whether you want to talk about my sets endeavors, Magic stuff, or games in general.
Tyler Girvan (I'm almost a Fight Club Reference!)
Email: girvat01@gmail.com
Skype: DurianG4 (Virginia, Unites States. Some random suburb outside of Washington D.C
P.S. I hate Betrayal at the House on Hill. So dull. I can't stand games that are all fluff with meaningless decisions (even if I can respect folks who just want storytelling experiences. It's just not for me.)
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
This is a great question, and I think we could have been more clear in the podcast.
Cinematic Design is specifically "designing a game in a way that evokes the experience of a story". To aid the feel of the story, it often paints a visual image in the player's head, like the Meteorite coming crashing down onto a monster's head. Dungeons and Dragons is a good-reference, because it's all about cinematic design. I've done a lot of work on RPGs, so it's great to hear someone spot that.
By the way, if you want to learn how to do level design for videogames, or a narrative designer, become a Dungeon Master. Tabletop RPGs (and LARPs for narrative design but not so much for level design) are basically the most powerful engines available to practice game design. It's like fruit fly science, you can generate 6 hours of content for testing every single week for a weekly game (easy to set up if you're in college especially). I'd credit a lot of my success in these areas to running a D&D game every week for about 4 years.
A related topic is "top-down design", as used extensively in Theros and Innistrad. Top-Down design has nothing to do with the end goal, it's all about the starting point. When you do Top-Down design, you're starting from the flavorful idea. "Let's make a card based on Superman" you say. Then you pick mechanics that evoke the feel of Superman. A good way to remember it is that you start from the top of the card (the name and art are the major flavor pieces) and then fill in the bottom (text box). When you do Bottom-Up design, you tend to start from a mechanical idea for what might go in the text box. "Let's make a common card that rewards you for playing instants and sorceries". Then you find a flavor that fits the ability.
Cinematic Design naturally uses a lot of Top-Down design in the process, but they are two very different things. Top-Down is about the design process, while Cinematic Design is about an aspect of the Design Goal.
Innistrad is very heavy on Cinematic Design, even more than Theros I believe. Maro is often talking about Cinematic Design. Cinematic Design is about creating an experience for the player beyond their normal life. It lets you feel like an awesome wizard, and practically see the scene playing out in front of you, even if you're not paying attention to it (which is why it's so weird when Remove Soul counters Soulless One). It's about bringing the story of the game to life, the way a movie lets you live vicariously through Luke Skywalker.
There just wasn't a term for it yet, so we made one.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
While I think the term has a nice ring to it, I would just caution from using cinematic as a synonym for story, as that term in particular has a lot of other connotations.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
That's very true. When I first read the title and while I was listening, it was very hard for me to divorce the term "Cinematic Design" from meaning designing cinematic sequences for games as opposed to a flavor or narrative design. I think that may be it's most common usage within the game designing I've experienced.
MCC - Winner (6): Oct 2014, Apr Nov 2017, Jan 2018, Apr Jun 2019 || Host (15): Dec 2014, Apr Jul Aug Dec 2015, Mar Jul Aug Oct 2016, Feb Jul 2017, Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here) || Judge (34): every month from Nov 2014 to Nov 2016 except Oct 2015, every month from Feb to Jul 2017 except Apr 2017, then Oct 2017, May Jun Nov 2018, Feb Jul 2019 (last one here)
CCL - Winner (3): Jul 2016 (tied with Flatline), May 2017, Jul 2019 (last one here) || Host (5): Feb 2015, Mar Apr May Jun 2016
DCC - Winner (1): Mar 2015 (tied with Piar) || Host (3): May Oct 2015, Jan 2016
• The two public custom sets I've been part a part of the design team for:
"Brotherhood of Ormos" - Blog post with all info - set thread - design skeleton / card list || "Extinctia: Homo Evanuit" - Blog post with all info - set thread - card list spreadsheet
• "The Lion's Lair", my article series about MTG and custom card design in particular. Latest article here. Here is the article index. Rather outdated by now, and based on the old MCC rubric, but I'm leaving this here for anybody that might be interested anyway.
• My only public attempt at being a writer: the story of my Leonin custom planeswalker Jeff Lionheart. (I have a very big one that I'm working on right now but that's private for now, and I don't know if I will ever actually publish it, and I also have ideas for multiple future ones, including one where I'm going to reprise Jeff.)
I agree that using it as a synonym for story would be wrong, but it's not intended to be a synonym for story. Cinematic Design is intended to evoke the experience being depicted, usually in a way that can be easily visualized. The emphasis on being able to SEE what the game is representing, is why we settled on Cinematic Design. If there's a better term to use, awesome. We struggled for hours to come up with a term that we felt worked.
Narrative Design is specifically about Stories, while Theatrical Design sounds even more niche than Cinematic. So, I don't think either of those terms works better. Doesn't mean there's not a better one out there though.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
Forgive me for getting so hung up on what is somewhat of a minor point, but I feel like cinema is actually the least similar medium to magic and other physical games. Film, television, and electronic games (the most "cinematic" mediums) try to create story experiences through immersion of the senses, but physical games are more like books in that they try to create story experiences through immersion of the mind. A movie or game cinematic will use visual and audio design to guide viewer experience, but in a physical game or book players are creating their own visuals and sounds in their imagination. Like words on a page, game pieces are mental representations of objects, which in many ways are fundamentally different from the physical representations of objects you'd see on a movie screen.
I'm not sure any of this is helpful in actually finding a good term, but maybe I can at least illuminate my thoughts on this matter and get some discussion going.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
The definition might be somewhat confusing to people focused on Cinema as a field of study, but ultimately it's the most specific word we could think of. If there's a better one, excellent. But at least it's more precise than the word "game" itself. Seriously, grab some popcorn and watch a bunch of people try to define the term "game" sometime in a comment thread for Gamasutra or some similar site. It's awesome.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
I realize that the aim here was more for "cinematics" in videos games as opposed to film. Interestingly, as you all know, they're also called "cut-scenes", which has taken up a bit of a negative connotation in recent years because of it's occasional overuse in breaking up the flow of a game. (This is why it seems like, to me, marketing people always use "cinematic" and gamers always use "cut-scene", be it a conscious or subconscious decision.)
Personally, the flow of a magic game reminds me much more of a film than a cut-scene (trying to avoid "cinematic" here ). The story of the game I'm playing doesn't happen in between the game being played, it happens as the game is played. I think I may have been a little thrown off with references to stuff like Betrayal, a game that very much lives on a movie-type aesthetic.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
I'm talking about in-between specific game actions in the post you're responding too. While you're considering your next move, the story isn't still going. It waits for your next move. We're both talking about the same thing here, it's just a tiny difference in how we're saying it.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
See, this point is a bit subjective because for me the story does continue between moves . I really do imagine the planeswalkers thinking out their next step, and what kinds of situations they would be in (holding out inside as their opponent's creatures batter at their door, or running through the woods as something chases them, trying to work through the next step in their plan).
That's beside the point though, what I'm really getting at is that the types of stories you talk about in the cast are IMO fundamentally different from both cinema as film and cinematics in video games. Cinematic design isn't a bad term, and anyone who hears it will sort of understand what it's getting at, but it's not really compatible with other areas of game design the same way most of our nomenclature is.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
As for the "the story is still going between moves", this has gone from semantics to... I don't even know what. I'm pretty sure you know I'm talking about events, not suggesting that the scene in peoples' heads evoked by the gameplay spontaneously stops existing while a move is being made. The story doesn't move ahead in events without the game providing those events. If you pause a movie, the movie doesn't keep going. If you take a break in a magic game for pizza, the story hasn't changed by the time you get back. If you pause playing KOTOR, you can imagine all sorts of other things happening while the game's paused, but Bastilla is still in the same position when you get back. If you go to the land of make-believe and intentionally pretend that things have happened, fine, but you don't need a game for that. It isn't the story of a game, it's imagination-land that a game inspired. That's fine, but it's not a disagreement with what I'm saying.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
Going off of what .Rai said though, is there a reason this isn't just called immersive design? This seems to capture the exact meaning you're looking for (immersive storytelling) without any of the terminology snags. I also think a term like this puts the emphasis in the right place: the emotional experience, whereas cinematic design evokes visuals and audio in a way that really don't apply to Magic as a medium. (There are plenty of non-visual thinkers who may not picture things being acted out the same way you or I do.)
EDIT: I often find that the difference between a discussion and an argument is that not everything you say has to be a direct rebuttal to what someone else said. I was just trying to share a silly quirk of mine.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
Also, "Immersive Design" sounds - and rightly - like what a lot of people feel like they're already doing. Pretty much everyone wants their game to be immersive, just like every company wants to provide good customer service. Making the term more distinct helps separate the distinct points we're going for.
That was our logic at least.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
I don't want to bog this discussion down more than we already have, but FWIW I think Go is engaging, not immersive. The difference between the two is, in my opinion, the trait of story telling you're looking for.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
IcariiFA
Tyler Girvan (I'm almost a Fight Club Reference!)
Email: girvat01@gmail.com
Skype: DurianG4 (Virginia, Unites States. Some random suburb outside of Washington D.C)
I really like the term "cinematic design". I knew what it meant immediately upon reading it. I don't think "immersive design" is quite the same thing. Thinking back to the earliest days of Magic, I remember being immersed in a fantasy world (at times) while playing Beta-Alliances (especially during Legends). Yes, there was a sense of story telling in Ice Age-Alliances, but I never experienced cinematic design until Mirage/Tempest. Cinematic design comes under the umbrella of immersive design. A story may be able to be derived or extrapolated from any game with immersive elements (D&D) where the "plot points" are infrequent, subtle, and/or nonexistent. In a cinematically designed game, the "plot points" and "scenes" are frequent, blatant, and deliberate.
Now I just have to listen to the podcast
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move."
Comic Book Set
Archester: Frontier of Steam (A steampunk set!)
A Good Place to Start Designing
Well said. Hope you enjoy the podcast.
We'll clarify some of these points in the next podcast. Basically, Cinematic Design is design is a design goal that aims to evoke the experience of being part of specific story events, to the point where you can easily visualize what's going on and it rings true (makes sense, feels correct, etc). There are a lot of elements that go into bringing the story to life. While individual cards that work well together to create clear story moments you can visualize, and avoid story glitches, is the backbone of the experience - other elements support this design goal.
Creating mechanics that evoke a feeling consistent with the story is important (and Innistrad does this beautifully). Additionally, a game's structure should naturally create a story structure that serves the themes (as mentioned in the podcast). Getting players to take physical actions that feel correct for the story events (like jabbing a button to punch and pulling a trigger to shoot in a videogame, instead of the other way around) also helps make the experience feel more genuine.
Cinematic Design is a specific design goal. It's a flexible one though, because you can layer it onto most other design goals. However, it's a powerful one as well - because whole games like Talisman, Betrayal at House on the Hill, Arkham Horror, Descent and a lot of other titles I could name prove that Cinematic Design can stand alone and be mega-popular in the process. I might not enjoy playing those games, but a lot of people clearly do.
And, when Cinematic Design is layered elegantly with other design goals, the results are mind-blowingly good. The X-Wing Miniatures Game is an excellent example.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane