Temporal Consistency - Revision history

Staffan Björk at 09:05, 8 April 2022

2022-04-08T09:05:19Z

Staffan Björk at 12:53, 18 March 2018

2018-03-18T12:53:28Z

Staffan Björk at 09:04, 21 September 2016

2016-09-21T09:04:53Z

Staffan Björk at 13:38, 26 August 2015

2015-08-26T13:38:12Z

Staffan Björk at 10:41, 9 July 2014

2014-07-09T10:41:09Z

Staffan Björk: /* Using the pattern */

2014-07-05T14:04:23Z

‎Using the pattern

Staffan Björk: /* Using the pattern */

2014-07-05T14:04:05Z

‎Using the pattern

Staffan Björk at 14:03, 5 July 2014

2014-07-05T14:03:06Z

Staffan Björk at 08:06, 1 July 2014

2014-07-01T08:06:28Z

Staffan Björk at 12:34, 30 June 2014

2014-06-30T12:34:09Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 [[Category:Patterns]]
 [[Category:Aesthetic Patterns]]
 [[Category:Narration Patterns]]
 [[Category:Needs revision]]

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 Several patterns may at first seem to not work together with [[Temporal Consistency]]. [[Game Pauses]] lets players have breaks and even plan what to do next in games but this does not have to be seen as gameplay activity, especially if the presentation of the game is hidden while the game is paused. The use of [[Lives]] lets players try the same challenges several times but as long as the [[Lives]] are [[Limited Resources]] each loss of one can be seen as a gameplay event and therefore maintain the [[Temporal Consistency]]. [[Cutscenes]] update diegetic events without player input, but as long as the game state is also updated in some fashion the [[Temporal Consistency]] can be perceived as being maintain with players having [[Downtime]]. [[Game Time Manipulation]], as for example found in [[Braid]], is another example of a pattern that does not need to break [[Temporal Consistency]]; this since those games typically rely on the previous gameplay events to create the situation for using the [[Game Time Manipulation]] meaningfully, and that the complete sequences of gameplay events can be seen as the "true" story just like in most time travel stories.
-Two pattern that ''do'' conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]] are [[Extra Chances]] and [[Save Points]]. [[Extra Chances]] do this quite obviously since they let players see the outcome of a gameplay event and then  let that outcome be superseded by a new one. [[Saving]], either in the form of [[Save Points]] or letting players save whenever they wish, breaks [[Temporal Consistency]] whenever they allow [[Save/Load Cycles]]. Many games do this since they allow multiple save points or do not enforce saving when quitting, but games that do combine [[Saving]] with [[Temporal Consistency]] include [[NetHack]], [[Minecraft]] and [[Dead Rising]]. [[Setback Penalties]] can also conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]] if a game's diegetic or narration doesn't acknowledge how many times players had to repeat actions or routes due to these [[Penalties]]. The use of [[Scenes]] ''may'' conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]], but this is sometimes done for narrative purposes, [[Fahrenheit]] and the [[Assassin's Creed series]] do this for example.
+Two pattern that ''do'' conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]] are [[Extra Chances]] and [[Save Points]]. [[Extra Chances]] do this quite obviously since they let players see the outcome of a gameplay event and then  let that outcome be superseded by a new one. [[Saving]], either in the form of [[Save Points]] or letting players save whenever they wish, breaks [[Temporal Consistency]] whenever they allow [[Save-Load Cycles]]. Many games do this since they allow multiple save points or do not enforce saving when quitting, but games that do combine [[Saving]] with [[Temporal Consistency]] include [[NetHack]], [[Minecraft]] and [[Dead Rising]]. [[Setback Penalties]] can also conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]] if a game's diegetic or narration doesn't acknowledge how many times players had to repeat actions or routes due to these [[Penalties]]. The use of [[Scenes]] ''may'' conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]], but this is sometimes done for narrative purposes, [[Fahrenheit]] and the [[Assassin's Creed series]] do this for example.
 [[Temporal Consistency]] is common for [[Multiplayer Games]] since discarding parts of gameplay without causing some players to feel that their [[Value of Effort]] is lost can be difficult. Examples that do this include [[Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory]] and the [[Left 4 Dead series]]; here the two teams can vote to restart levels and thereby remove part of play sessions from what will become game sessions. [[Multiplayer Games]] with [[Persistent Game Worlds]] may wish to avoid breaking [[Temporal Consistency]] since this disrupt players' common experience. [[Instances]] makes this difficult by causing [[Non-Consistent Narration]] but may be necessary for technical reasons or to keep players in close proximity to each other for specific parts of the gameplay. In [[:Category:Live Action Roleplaying Games|Live Action Roleplaying Games]], the use of [[Contextualization]] techniques break [[Temporal Consistency]] as soon as they are used to stage [[Scenes]] of the future or the past.
@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 [[Save Points]],
 [[Saving]],
-[[Save/Load Cycles]],
+[[Save-Load Cycles]],
 [[Scenes]],
 [[Setback Penalties]],

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 Unless players let their opponents take back moves, traditional [[:Category:Board Games|Board Games]] such as [[Chess]] and [[Go]] have [[Temporal Consistency]] and this applies for most modern [[:Category:Board Games|Board Games]] as well, e.g. [[Amun-Re]], [[Ghost Stories]], [[Puerto Rico]], and [[Scrabble]]. [[:Category:Tabletop Roleplaying Games|Tabletop Roleplaying Games]] such as [[Dungeons & Dragons]] and the [[Basic Role-Playing]] system inherited this feature but it is typically not present in [[:Category:Computer-based Roleplaying Games|computer-based versions]].
-While many [[:Category:Computer Games|Computer Games]] do not have [[Temporal Consistency]] it is not uncommon. [[:Category:Arcade Games|Arcade Games]] such as [[Asteroids]], [[Gauntlet]], [[Pac-Man]], and [[Space Invaders]] have [[Temporal Consistency]] since gameplay continued without pause (except for short cutscenes) until players had lost all their lives. Many [[:Category:Racing Games|Racing Games]], e.g. [[Outrun]], the [[Sega Rally series]], the [[Need for Speed series]], and the [[Gran Turismo series]] have it - either from working like [[:Category:Arcade Games|Arcade Games]] or by the fact that failures to get good positions do not negatively affect any gameplay statistics and can thereby be incorporated into game sessions without negative effects. Although [[:Category:Computer-based Roleplaying Games|Computer-based Roleplaying Games]] typically do not have [[Temporal Consistency]], games with somewhat similar structures such as [[NetHack]] and [[Minecraft]] do, as does those with games with persistent game worlds such as [[Eve Online]], [[FarmVille]], [[Ravenwood Fair]], and [[World of Warcraft]].
+While many [[:Category:Computer Games|Computer Games]] do not have [[Temporal Consistency]] it is not uncommon. [[:Category:Arcade Games|Arcade Games]] such as [[Asteroids]], [[Gauntlet]], [[Pac-Man]], and [[Space Invaders]] have [[Temporal Consistency]] since gameplay continued without pause (except for short cutscenes) until players had lost all their lives. Many [[:Category:Racing Games|Racing Games]], e.g. [[Out Run]], the [[Sega Rally series]], the [[Need for Speed series]], and the [[Gran Turismo series]] have it - either from working like [[:Category:Arcade Games|Arcade Games]] or by the fact that failures to get good positions do not negatively affect any gameplay statistics and can thereby be incorporated into game sessions without negative effects. Although [[:Category:Computer-based Roleplaying Games|Computer-based Roleplaying Games]] typically do not have [[Temporal Consistency]], games with somewhat similar structures such as [[NetHack]] and [[Minecraft]] do, as does those with games with persistent game worlds such as [[Eve Online]], [[FarmVille]], [[Ravenwood Fair]], and [[World of Warcraft]].
 == Using the pattern ==

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 Several patterns may at first seem to not work together with [[Temporal Consistency]]. [[Game Pauses]] lets players have breaks and even plan what to do next in games but this does not have to be seen as gameplay activity, especially if the presentation of the game is hidden while the game is paused. The use of [[Lives]] lets players try the same challenges several times but as long as the [[Lives]] are [[Limited Resources]] each loss of one can be seen as a gameplay event and therefore maintain the [[Temporal Consistency]]. [[Cutscenes]] update diegetic events without player input, but as long as the game state is also updated in some fashion the [[Temporal Consistency]] can be perceived as being maintain with players having [[Downtime]]. [[Game Time Manipulation]], as for example found in [[Braid]], is another example of a pattern that does not need to break [[Temporal Consistency]]; this since those games typically rely on the previous gameplay events to create the situation for using the [[Game Time Manipulation]] meaningfully, and that the complete sequences of gameplay events can be seen as the "true" story just like in most time travel stories.
-Two pattern that ''do'' conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]] are [[Extra Chances]] and [[Save Points]]. [[Extra Chances]] do this quite obviously since they let players see the outcome of a gameplay event and then  let that outcome be superseded by a new one. [[Saving]], either in the form of [[Save Points]] or letting players save whenever they wish, breaks [[Temporal Consistency]] whenever they allow [[Save/Load Cycles]]. Many games do this since they allow multiple save points or do not enforce saving when quitting, but games that do combine [[Saving]] with [[Temporal Consistency]] include [[NetHack]], [[Minecraft]] and [[Dead Rising]]. The use of [[Scenes]] ''may'' conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]], it gives designers power to do so if they wish for narrative purposes, [[Fahrenheit]] and the [[Assassin's Creed series]] do this for example.
+Two pattern that ''do'' conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]] are [[Extra Chances]] and [[Save Points]]. [[Extra Chances]] do this quite obviously since they let players see the outcome of a gameplay event and then  let that outcome be superseded by a new one. [[Saving]], either in the form of [[Save Points]] or letting players save whenever they wish, breaks [[Temporal Consistency]] whenever they allow [[Save/Load Cycles]]. Many games do this since they allow multiple save points or do not enforce saving when quitting, but games that do combine [[Saving]] with [[Temporal Consistency]] include [[NetHack]], [[Minecraft]] and [[Dead Rising]]. [[Setback Penalties]] can also conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]] if a game's diegetic or narration doesn't acknowledge how many times players had to repeat actions or routes due to these [[Penalties]]. The use of [[Scenes]] ''may'' conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]], but this is sometimes done for narrative purposes, [[Fahrenheit]] and the [[Assassin's Creed series]] do this for example.
 [[Temporal Consistency]] is common for [[Multiplayer Games]] since discarding parts of gameplay without causing some players to feel that their [[Value of Effort]] is lost can be difficult. Examples that do this include [[Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory]] and the [[Left 4 Dead series]]; here the two teams can vote to restart levels and thereby remove part of play sessions from what will become game sessions. [[Multiplayer Games]] with [[Persistent Game Worlds]] may wish to avoid breaking [[Temporal Consistency]] since this disrupt players' common experience. [[Instances]] makes this difficult by causing [[Non-Consistent Narration]] but may be necessary for technical reasons or to keep players in close proximity to each other for specific parts of the gameplay. In [[:Category:Live Action Roleplaying Games|Live Action Roleplaying Games]], the use of [[Contextualization]] techniques break [[Temporal Consistency]] as soon as they are used to stage [[Scenes]] of the future or the past.
@@ Line 64: / Line 64: @@
 [[Save/Load Cycles]],
 [[Scenes]],
 [[Smooth Learning Curves]]

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 Two pattern that ''do'' conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]] are [[Extra Chances]] and [[Save Points]]. [[Extra Chances]] do this quite obviously since they let players see the outcome of a gameplay event and then  let that outcome be superseded by a new one. [[Saving]], either in the form of [[Save Points]] or letting players save whenever they wish, breaks [[Temporal Consistency]] whenever they allow [[Save/Load Cycles]]. Many games do this since they allow multiple save points or do not enforce saving when quitting, but games that do combine [[Saving]] with [[Temporal Consistency]] include [[NetHack]], [[Minecraft]] and [[Dead Rising]]. The use of [[Scenes]] ''may'' conflict with [[Temporal Consistency]], it gives designers power to do so if they wish for narrative purposes, [[Fahrenheit]] and the [[Assassin's Creed series]] do this for example.
-[[Temporal Consistency]] is common for [[Multiplayer Games]] since discarding parts of gameplay without causing some players to feel that their [[Value of Effort]] is lost can be difficult. Examples that do this include [[Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory]] and the [[Left 4 Dead series]]; here the two teams can vote to restart levels and thereby remove part of play sessions from what will become game sessions. [[Multiplayer Games]] with [[Persistent Game Worlds]] may wish to avoid breaking [[Temporal Consistency]] since this disrupt players' common experience. [[Instances]] makes this difficult but may be necessary for technical reasons or to keep players in close proximity to each other for specific parts of the gameplay. In [[:Category:Live Action Roleplaying Games|Live Action Roleplaying Games]], the use of [[Contextualization]] techniques break [[Temporal Consistency]] as soon as they are used to stage [[Scenes]] of the future or the past.
+[[Temporal Consistency]] is common for [[Multiplayer Games]] since discarding parts of gameplay without causing some players to feel that their [[Value of Effort]] is lost can be difficult. Examples that do this include [[Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory]] and the [[Left 4 Dead series]]; here the two teams can vote to restart levels and thereby remove part of play sessions from what will become game sessions. [[Multiplayer Games]] with [[Persistent Game Worlds]] may wish to avoid breaking [[Temporal Consistency]] since this disrupt players' common experience. [[Instances]] makes this difficult by causing [[Non-Consistent Narration]] but may be necessary for technical reasons or to keep players in close proximity to each other for specific parts of the gameplay. In [[:Category:Live Action Roleplaying Games|Live Action Roleplaying Games]], the use of [[Contextualization]] techniques break [[Temporal Consistency]] as soon as they are used to stage [[Scenes]] of the future or the past.
 For [[Persistent Game Worlds]], having [[Events Timed to the Real World]] can be seen as a way of modulating [[Temporal Consistency]] since it links the gameplay quite directly to the flow of regular time.
@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 [[Extra Chances]],
 [[Instances]],
 [[Save Points]],
 [[Saving]],