   One Button
  How would you design a game where the only thing the player could do is press a single button?  (Aside from the shallow and simplistic reflex gameplay behind Dragon''s Lair, Space Ace and parts of Shenmue).My thoughts were that there could be two physical actions the player could do:  one press, and a double-press.  I think a triple or more press would make things a bit too frantic and complicated.So then with that interface of two actions, you could have a game where context was everything.  The player''s character responds to button presses differently in different locations/situations.  For example, if the player is near a block, one press would push the block and two presses would pull the block.So now, given this interface framework, what kind of game could you design?  
Spaced Out. (EDIT: Don't bother following the link, it's dead now)(found out about this through John Hattan's Diary a few months back)EDIT: Damn, it's dead. Basically the game was a spaceship moving through a horizontal tunnel (sideview, think Defender II). The floor and ceiling changed height and their where obstacles. There where also pickups (coins I think) which increased your score, the other factor affecting score was how long you survived. You moved at a constant speed and press the one button to apply thrust. The thrust would push you upwards, and gravity would pull you down. It was a very fun game (great way to waste time), though it did suffer from the fact that it was easier (in some cases far easier) on slow machines.[edited by - michalson on December 11, 2002 9:21:07 PM];  If you are saying that you can ONLY press a button (no directional control or anything), then perhaps you are limiting the player too much (IMHO) but your method would be the best I could think of. Of course this might be something like a child's game where the player shouldn't be expected to move around at all.If you do have directional controls, then let the direction be the context. If the player presses the button and then moves away from the block, he pulls it. If he moves towards the block, he pushes it.EDIT:Haha maybe I should read the text more carefully.I still say that the lack of directional controls would be a problem, but I could see a puzzle game where you move blocks or something....I could also see people getting upset that the double press would actually get registered as two single presses.[edited by - GBGames on December 11, 2002 9:22:21 PM];quote:Original post by Michalson   Spaced Out. (EDIT: Don't bother following the link, it's dead now)(found out about this through John Hattan's Diary a few months back)EDIT: Damn, it's dead. Basically the game was a spaceship moving through a horizontal tunnel (sideview, think Defender II). The floor and ceiling changed height and their where obstacles. There where also pickups (coins I think) which increased your score, the other factor affecting score was how long you survived. You moved at a constant speed and press the one button to apply thrust. The thrust would push you upwards, and gravity would pull you down. It was a very fun game (great way to waste time), though it did suffer from the fact that it was easier (in some cases far easier) on slow machines.[edited by - michalson on December 11, 2002 9:21:07 PM]  Oh yeah, the  worm game ! Good point!Still, double press wouldn't add anything to this kind of game. I think the double press/click can't be that useful by itself, but I am sure someone will be innovative enough to work on it...I wish I had the time to try to solve this challenge.[edited by - GBGames on December 11, 2002 9:27:51 PM];  Anyone remember Spin Doctor?  The board was a grid of dots, and you were a bar of light just long enough to reach from one dot to the adjacent one.  you swung around in a lazy circle, and when you wanted to move from one dot to the next, you hold down the button.  There were actually four different actions available, though, si it isn''t quite so simplistic as your idea here.  You could swing to the next dot, "bounce off to reverse your direction, swing-bouce, so you immediately went the opposite direction on the other dot, or just change direction in mid-swing, which costs you time.  Neat game, fun and addictive.  ;  You could have a state based system were one press executes the action and a double-click changes what that action is.  Quickie example:You have a robot.  It''s default state is stopped.Double-clicking will take you through the following states:1) Accelerate 102) Decelerate 103) Turn 10 degrees CW4) Turn 10 degrees CCWThen by switching states and "activating" them you could pilot the little guy around...not very easily, mind you, but you wouldn''t need anything but one button...;  One button can do a LOT!There is a Dreamcast old school shooter style game called Mars Matrix that features a very flexable one button system.Essentialy in the game a single button is used for shooting...but you can shoot in, something like, five different ways (the game also uses the direction pad...but it has no effect on how you shoot)Basicly...when you quickly press the button...your little ship shoots out regular bullets....When you shoot a number of such bullets quickly, but then press and hold down the button for a second before releaseing it (like tap-tap-tap-pause)...then you ship shoots out a much larger "shot-gun" type blast...If you press and hold before releaseing several times in a row (pause-pause-pause) the ship shoots out a even larger "homeing missle" attack And if you just hold the button down...the ship will eventualy charge up it''s main weapon ... which will cause all enemy fire to reflect back against themI think there is another shoot type in there...but I don''t recall exactly what it is at the moment...anyway all these shots can be fired by useing only one button and with no other input....As for a game that uses one button...how about some sort of "anti-virus" game in which the player "attacks" invadeing viruses...there can be a number of values that are effected when the button is pressed (and other ones that are effected when the button isn''t being pressed)...lets say that you have four values...for the sake of simplicity I''ll call them Red, Green, Blue, and Alpha...each value ranges from 0 to 100...whenever the Alpha value reaches 100...your "microscope" fires a blast into the virus (each virus being of a different "color") and when the three colors reach 100 and beyond they "roll over" to zero...when the button is pressed Red increases by 2 points, Green by 3, Blue by one...and Alpha by 1...when the button isn''t being pressed...Red decreases by 1, Green by 2, Blue by 4 and Alpha by 2...the trick would be to fire the correct shot to kill the virus...the shot type that you fire depends on whichever (Red, Green or Blue) was the highest when Alpha reached 100...Course if you fire a Red shot into a Green virus...it grows faster...with some simple rules set-up like "Rock, Paper, & Sissors" you could end up with a very complex little game ;quote:Original post by beantas  ...Dragon''s Lair....   Dragon''s Lair by Don Bluth.. my god that was cruel. Certainly one of the games that inspired me.Is there some PC version and does somebody know where it could be available? I would die to play one more game of Dragon''s Lair!(I would always gather a crowd watching when playing in the arcade, hehe good ol'' days);  Given only one options button, you could break things down into a menu. EVERY MENU NEEDS A CANCEL OPTION! It''d get a bit monotonous so I''d agree with contextual button pressing.On a similiar note, we sort of already have experience with a single button controller. Look under your right hand. Yeah, the mouse/trackball. I know it has two buttons, but everything seems to work around that left click.   ;quote:Original post by Inmate2993  On a similiar note, we sort of already have experience with a single button controller. Look under your right hand. Yeah, the mouse/trackball. I know it has two buttons, but everything seems to work around that left click.  That''s hardly one button.You have 2d movement as well which gives you next to endless possibilities. I don''t really know how to define this in specific terms.  