Assignment 1 – Analysis of Existing Game: Overcooked! 2 Game Review

KOH WEE LUN CLARENCE, A0187535U

Short Description of Overcooked! 2 (Versus Mode, 2v2)

When the Nintendo Switch was released in 2017, along came the game Overcooked!, a co-op arcade action game about chefs scrambling to get food orders out of unique kitchens. The refreshing and original concept of the game made it a hit. In August 2018, a sequel of the game was released, and it was met with considerable fanfare as well. The game play is like that of Overcooked!, whereby cooks in a kitchen get tasked with many orders and they must accomplish as many of these orders as they can. The chefs must not only pick out ingredients from crates, they still must chop them up, remove them from chopping boards, cook these ingredients and ensure that they do not “overcook”. After which, the cooked ingredients must be placed onto a plate with other cooked/raw ingredients to make a complete food item. This food item then needs to be brought to a tiny window to be served before the order is considered completed. The game play usually involves 4 players, 2 players cooperating with each other to beat the other 2 players who are on the opposing team. It is possible for just 2 players to play the game as well, however, I will be focusing on communicating ideas for a 4-player game play, specifically the Versus Mode.

Overcooked! 2 Versus Mode 2v2

Game Analysis of Overcooked! 2 (Versus Mode, 2v2)

While playing the game, I feel a sense of anxiousness because I can see the orders piling up very quickly and as a result, I become flustered. It is necessary for each pair to work well in order to complete more orders than the opposing team. While I play the game, I am most focused on the orders list, and sticking strictly to only the things I am delegated to do. If I am supposed to take the ingredients, chop them up and serve the done dishes, I will stick to doing these tasks and nothing else. This prevents a conflict of responsibilities between my teammate and me.

Overcooked! 2 involves arenas which are static, whereby the kitchens remain the same throughout the 3 minutes of game play. It also features dynamic arenas, which morphs every 15 seconds or so, for players who are itching for an additional level of challenge. With the dynamic arenas, players must think on their toes, because the tasks the player will be able to accomplish changes according to how the arena morphs. When I got stuck on one side of the arena, I was only able to toss the ingredients to my teammate and she had to do all the chopping, cooking and plating, then she had to toss the completed food items to my side for me to serve. This is occasionally frustrating, because we ended up tossing completed orders into the water or molten lava, which render the food items useless. Hence, we must redo the same order again which reduces the chance of completing the order request satisfactorily. However, this makes the game even more addictive, as the additional layer of challenge invites players to come back to compete for an even better score if they know that they were delayed due to mistakes.

Cooperation is key in Overcooked! 2. In order to complete as many orders as possible, 2 players must communicate throughout the 3 minutes of game play effectively, especially when the arena is dynamic, or if the arena allows for the opponent pair to steal completed orders/ingredients from you and your teammate. There is synergy when the players work together because of how the game mechanics work. If players decide to work on completing orders alone, from getting the ingredients to serving the completed orders, it would be too slow, and the points earned would be affected. The optimal scores are achieved the Overcooked! 2 Versus Mode only  through cooperation.

Despite the high-level of cooperation required between teammates, the competition element of the game is not ignored. In the Overcooked! 2 Versus Mode, teams of 2 compete against each other to see which team can earn the most points in the same time period. Some game arenas are also pieced in a way that allows players to steal the completed food items of their opponents, making the game play even more challenging. All 4 players are playing within the same arena and their actions can affect one another. Players can block opponents from getting certain ingredients by standing in the way of their opponents. The competition aspect of Overcooked! 2 makes the game more entertaining; players must not only strategise on ways to cooperate with their teammate and compete against their opponents.

Finally, the game has an intuitive and bright visual interface to complement its intention of being a party game. The intuitive interface is a necessary game aesthetic as it prevents the complication of the fast-paced game. Players can glance down quickly to check the time left and their current scores, which are placed at the bottom right and the bottom left of the screen respectively. This saves time, as placing these elsewhere might require players to glance around for a couple more milliseconds, affecting the players’ momentum. Also, the bright colours used to paint the whole game provides a cheerful atmosphere, uplifting the essence of fun. The background music used is upbeat, which complements the theme effectively. It also speeds up towards the end, as the game clock approaches 0. This adds on to the adrenaline that the players feel towards the end of the game, as they eagerly clear as many of the remaining orders as possible.

In conclusion, Overcooked! 2 is a fantastic game. It is a good example of how real-world scenarios can inspire interesting and refreshing game plays that work. Even though it does not have a detailed narrative, nor does it have stellar graphics, it stands out because it is an effective party game. Its inviting and fun atmosphere, and the relatively short duration keeps players entertained for hours. In a generation where we are so disconnected by technology, maybe it is time we consider how we can adapt technology to help us connect, just like how Overcooked! 2 has achieved it.

Game play demo link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcVISRmANIo

Homework 1: VR and MR headset review

KOH WEE LUN CLARENCE, A0187535U

My first interaction with Virtual Reality (VR) headsets came when my friend asked if I was interested in developing for VR because his team in Engineering was keen to do VR training simulations with the Oculus Quest. I was first shown “First Contact”, a demo scene Oculus provides and was immediately blown away by the amazing graphics. I was also amazed by the ability of me to interact with the scene, which I knew was not actually realistic, but it felt so unbelievably real. After my first introduction to VR, I was certain that this is a field I want to work in, because I see its potential in solving so many real-world problems.

In fact, I was so intrigued by VR that after I was shown the demo scene, I went back home and immediately searched for how I could purchase my own Oculus Quest, only to realise how expensive it is (priced around $739). Upon further research into gaming headsets, I realised that PlayStation VR cost about $443, which sounds better in terms of price, until I realised that I would still need to purchase a PlayStation console and other hardware to complete the PlayStation VR set up, which ultimately suggests that it is a lot more pricey than the Oculus Quest. Developing for the PlayStation VR itself is also a hassle because you need to get the devkit from Sony themselves and it can be overwhelming for new developers to dive into development for VR. Oculus Quest development is pretty much the same as developing for Android since the Quest runs on Android, therefore the barriers to entry is lower because there are tutorials readily available on the web.

Then came the Oculus Rift S, which is about the same price as the Oculus Quest as well. And considering that it is a PC-powered headset, I felt that it would be inconvenient, especially comparing to the Oculus Quest which allows to walk around a virtual environment with no annoying cables attached. In general, these VR headsets felt a little pricey to me, especially since I just began getting involved in VR. That was when I found out about the Google Daydream View 2.

The Google Daydream View 2 is available at a relative low price of SGD $160. It seems lightweight and very portable, compatible with many Android phones such as those from Samsung, Huawei, LG and Google themselves. This compatibility suggest that it is a very accessible headset for anyone who is keen to try out VR for entertainment purposes. Based on video reviews, it appears to user-friendly with not a too complicated set up process. The fact that it is made of microfibres suggests that it is incredibly lightweight compared to the chunkier PC-powered headsets such as the ones by HTC or Oculus. The downside will be the graphical quality when compared to these PC-powered, higher end headsets. Also, if you do not own a phone which is compatible with the headset then you are unable to experience the Google Daydream View 2. However, in my opinion, this is the best entry level headset for anyone keen on trying out VR.

If I want to develop an application that everyone can experience easily, I would develop it for Android tested with Google Daydream View 2, because it will provide greater market reach albeit poorer quality graphics.

Google Daydream View 2

However, if I had the money, I would still choose to go with the Oculus Quest as my favourite VR headset. It is insane how portable the Quest is. When getting my project ready for demonstration to the Singapore Science Centre, all I really needed to do was to run my application once to test whether it works. There was no need to set up cameras around the room, connecting the controllers, turning on SteamVR, none of that extra setup required. On top of that, even though the Quest does not have as many games as the PlayStation VR, experts believe that the games available in the Oculus store will soon take over that of PlayStation store. Also, the Quest has superb graphics that is close enough to that provided with the Oculus Rift S, therefore, given the convenience, and the quality of graphics, I will put the Oculus Quest as my favourite VR headset.

Oculus Quest

I have never dabbled with any MR headsets, and while searching online, I realised that the concept of a MR headset is not clearly defined (most MR Headsets in fact offer more of a VR experience than actual interaction with the physical environment). Meanwhile, headsets defined as AR headsets such as the Microsoft HoloLens 2 and the Magic Leap One, allows users to interact with 3D virtual objects, and these objects can interact with the real-world users see. Therefore, I will be comparing these 2 headsets because in my opinion, the other MR headsets are in fact virtual reality headsets.

Based on the demos I viewed, I will be reviewing the headsets based on tracking and controllers, software platform and interface, and finally content and applications.

In terms of tracking and controllers, the HoloLens 2 stands out, because it can follow the position of the ten fingers of the user, to the point that you can play a piano in augmented reality. On the other hand, the Magic Leap 1 works with a controller, but also provides hand tracking features. However, the hand tracking feature of the Magic Leap 1 does not detect the position of the user’s hands in world space, but it merely detects predefined gesture commands.

In terms of the software platform and interface, the HoloLens 2 offers a very intuitive interface whereby the user can interact directly with buttons using their hands. In addition, the HoloLens 2 features voice recognition, which appears to be very easy to use. The Magic Leap 1’s interface seams pretty much like that you would get in a VR headset, whereby you scroll through windows using the controller and you cannot interact with the buttons on the interface directly.

And finally, the content and applications offered with the HoloLens 2 far exceeds that available for the Magic Leap 1. HoloLens 2 offers all applications available from the first HoloLens. It also includes a collaboration application called Spatial, which offers a unique and effective way of collaboration that I feel will revolutionise corporate meetings in years to come. The Magic Leap 1 has a lack of applications and current applications are technical demos rather than real life experiences. Even though the Magic Leap 1 is cheaper than the HoloLens 2, both headsets are very expensive in the first place. Therefore, I foresee that at this stage of MR headsets, the applications will be more catered to big companies who are keen on adopting MR in their training or day-to-day operations. Therefore, if I owned a big company and if I wanted to depend on MR for my workers, I would spend the extra amount of money to get the HoloLens 2 rather than the Magic Leap 1, simply because it provides a significantly better user experience. Therefore, I prefer the HoloLens 2.

Microsoft HoloLens 2