Comments on: Dealing with “Shrink: The Game” http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/ by Daniel Benmergui Fri, 03 Feb 2012 21:51:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Ava Avane Dawn http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/comment-page-1/#comment-12583 Ava Avane Dawn Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:36:53 +0000 http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/#comment-12583 Since you still haven't done it: http://www.increpare.com/2009/11/therapy-game/ Since you still haven’t done it:

http://www.increpare.com/2009/11/therapy-game/

]]> By: Daniel Benmergui http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/comment-page-1/#comment-8537 Daniel Benmergui Mon, 18 May 2009 00:13:56 +0000 http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/#comment-8537 @Frank: Indeed, I got DSM-IV as well as some case studies of family therapy that are very interesting... Then I put this game on hold, but I might pick it up again. In a sort of way, my current games have a vein on what I wanted to achieve with Shrink. @Frank:
Indeed, I got DSM-IV as well as some case studies of family therapy that are very interesting…

Then I put this game on hold, but I might pick it up again. In a sort of way, my current games have a vein on what I wanted to achieve with Shrink.

]]> By: jackson http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/comment-page-1/#comment-8532 jackson Sun, 17 May 2009 05:30:17 +0000 http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/#comment-8532 you could go for a "psychonauts" angle, visualizing the different patients' mental states. you could go for a “psychonauts” angle, visualizing the different patients’ mental states.

]]> By: Frank Looman http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/comment-page-1/#comment-8515 Frank Looman Sat, 16 May 2009 00:29:32 +0000 http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/#comment-8515 Also: sorry for the spelling errors. I'm inclined to say that english isn't my native language, but that doesn't excuse me from spelling 'focusing' with two 's'es. >_< Also: sorry for the spelling errors. I’m inclined to say that english isn’t my native language, but that doesn’t excuse me from spelling ‘focusing’ with two ‘s’es. >_<

]]> By: Frank Looman http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/comment-page-1/#comment-8513 Frank Looman Sat, 16 May 2009 00:27:54 +0000 http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/#comment-8513 My advice is to pick up a copy of DSM-IV, otherwise known as the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders, episode 4. :P You'll want to focus on personality disorders. Other diagnoses like drug or alcohol dependency, mental retardation, and/or psychosomatic disorders may add some flavor, but should be disregarded since you want to focus on a gaming experience based on psycho-analysis (at least, that's what I'm guessing since you have a picture of Freud on here). Since you're focussing on the psychoanalytical model, i.e. purely focussing on the patients' thoughts, dreams and emotions, you should probably stick to (dysfunctional) personality traits, lest you overcomplicate matters for the sake of realism. So my advice is, crack open a DSM-IV, look at personality disorders, then base each character on those disorders, only give them only one or two traits as described there. You see, a psychiatric diagnosis based on DSM IV is made by comparing the personality traits listed there with the patient's, and when a certain number of personality traits are identified (usually about 4 or 5), the diagnosis is made. As you will probably notice is that when you imagine a person having 4 or 5 traits of any of the personality disorders listed, you can be pretty sure that the person in question can be diagnosed by laymen as 'batshit insane'. In other words: you lose any incentive to delve deeper into the psyche of your client. After all: you'd rather see that person behind bars. No, instead focus on only one or two personality traits. You should build your characters/levels around those: how would such a person act, given those personality traits? How would he or she react to your questions? How would the client deal with stress or disappointment? As the client/level advances, maybe throw in another dysfunctional reaction. That's how a player gets sucked in. -- The reason I'm giving this particular advice is because EVERYONE has one or two personality quirks that would fit nicely into the diagnoses as presented by DSM-IV. In fact, you can have a blast with your friends just diagnosing people you know. It's both the strength and the risk of the manual. And since everyone knows at least one person with personality quirks belonging to the Theatrical or Avoidant personality disorder (to name only two), it's all the easier to relate to clients/levels that exhibit the same behaviourisms. And by recognising those behaviourisms (possibly subconsciously), players are all the more motivated to play through the game. That said: Sorry for the great big wall of text, I guess I'm just really inspired by your innovative and experimental approach. And a game about shrinks? I'm giddy! My advice is to pick up a copy of DSM-IV, otherwise known as the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders, episode 4. :P

You’ll want to focus on personality disorders. Other diagnoses like drug or alcohol dependency, mental retardation, and/or psychosomatic disorders may add some flavor, but should be disregarded since you want to focus on a gaming experience based on psycho-analysis (at least, that’s what I’m guessing since you have a picture of Freud on here). Since you’re focussing on the psychoanalytical model, i.e. purely focussing on the patients’ thoughts, dreams and emotions, you should probably stick to (dysfunctional) personality traits, lest you overcomplicate matters for the sake of realism.

So my advice is, crack open a DSM-IV, look at personality disorders, then base each character on those disorders, only give them only one or two traits as described there.

You see, a psychiatric diagnosis based on DSM IV is made by comparing the personality traits listed there with the patient’s, and when a certain number of personality traits are identified (usually about 4 or 5), the diagnosis is made.

As you will probably notice is that when you imagine a person having 4 or 5 traits of any of the personality disorders listed, you can be pretty sure that the person in question can be diagnosed by laymen as ‘batshit insane’. In other words: you lose any incentive to delve deeper into the psyche of your client. After all: you’d rather see that person behind bars.

No, instead focus on only one or two personality traits. You should build your characters/levels around those: how would such a person act, given those personality traits? How would he or she react to your questions? How would the client deal with stress or disappointment?

As the client/level advances, maybe throw in another dysfunctional reaction. That’s how a player gets sucked in.

–

The reason I’m giving this particular advice is because EVERYONE has one or two personality quirks that would fit nicely into the diagnoses as presented by DSM-IV. In fact, you can have a blast with your friends just diagnosing people you know. It’s both the strength and the risk of the manual. And since everyone knows at least one person with personality quirks belonging to the Theatrical or Avoidant personality disorder (to name only two), it’s all the easier to relate to clients/levels that exhibit the same behaviourisms. And by recognising those behaviourisms (possibly subconsciously), players are all the more motivated to play through the game.

That said: Sorry for the great big wall of text, I guess I’m just really inspired by your innovative and experimental approach. And a game about shrinks? I’m giddy!

]]> By: EmerxD http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/comment-page-1/#comment-8427 EmerxD Sun, 10 May 2009 16:26:36 +0000 http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/#comment-8427 about the first problem, for the "intuitive guess", i think it would help that the patients have very inusual, fantastics or no sense problems. so, this way, cant be affected by human logic to "win" the game. some like metaphors. (sorry for my english) about the first problem, for the “intuitive guess”, i think it would help that the patients have very inusual, fantastics or no sense problems. so, this way, cant be affected by human logic to “win” the game. some like metaphors.

(sorry for my english)

]]> By: Dennis Moore http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/comment-page-1/#comment-8380 Dennis Moore Fri, 08 May 2009 22:38:07 +0000 http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/#comment-8380 What's up with this game? I'd love to play it. What’s up with this game? I’d love to play it.

]]> By: Strangelander http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/comment-page-1/#comment-8212 Strangelander Wed, 06 May 2009 08:44:20 +0000 http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/#comment-8212 Are you aware of The Asylum? http://www.gamershood.com/flashgames/276 Are you aware of The Asylum?
http://www.gamershood.com/flashgames/276

]]> By: Ludomancy » Ludosophy http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/comment-page-1/#comment-577 Ludomancy » Ludosophy Tue, 11 Sep 2007 02:23:45 +0000 http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/2007/01/29/dealing-with-shrink-the-game/#comment-577 [...] psychology in the hopes of creating a simplified model for Shrink, I discovered myself building wacky theories on how the human psyche may work that would make Freud [...] [...] psychology in the hopes of creating a simplified model for Shrink, I discovered myself building wacky theories on how the human psyche may work that would make Freud [...]

]]>