Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Banner advertising on our site currently available from just $5!


1. Learn about the promo. 2. Sign up for GDNet+. 3. Set up your advert!


#ActualMario D.

Posted 26 October 2013 - 11:27 AM

I'm confused on the thesis here. I'm looking for some insight on game design and I'm not getting it.

 

You talk about:

  1. What game design is.
  2. Making sure you know your different kinds of logical fallacies
  3. Some stuff about how art, sound design and programming is.
  4. Game design documents
  5. And, getting hot in game development.
  6. Oh and something about writing a book.

There are way too many subjects to put in one post to create any meaningful insight.

 

At first I thought, "This is obviously something very introductory, I'm not getting insight because I know these things already..." But there are are things you assume your readers should know (if this is supposed to be some introductory text). For example, assuming they know what a game design document is or what feature creep is.

 

 

But I like to think this is for other people who have some experience in game design. And if that's the case, well...

  1. Game design can't be "the process of what works well in a game." That is such a broad statement that says nothing about what game design is. Creating game art can be the process of what works well in the game (in terms of theme, palette, mood, etc) as well as programming can be the process of what works well in a game (in terms of code library choice, engine compatibility, and much more)
  2. Game design somehow has something to do with your ability to identify logical fallacies?! I mean sure they are nice to know but it doesn't make you a better game designer to beat somebody in an argument...it makes you a better debater.

There is a bunch more things I wish to identify but I guess its best summarized like this: The title of this post was "My article on Game Design" and the only real part that addresses game design was the first paragraph and numbered list. And that paragraph doesn't say anything, its too broad.

 

 

 

I know it was just your opinion but usually opinions are posted to present an argument and start a discussion but no argument is presented. Usually opinions like this are trying to tell people of the experience they've had and why that's true but there is never a "this is why..." kind of statement or any kind of specific experience imparted here.

 

Entire books are dedicated to "what game design is" it's too hard to summarize it in a forum post.

 

Usually opinions like this are posted to present an idea to see what other people think and not necessarily trying to create a discussion, just a critique. That's what this is. I hope my critique was useful in someway, if not, lets discuss that.


#2Mario D.

Posted 26 October 2013 - 11:24 AM

I'm confused on the thesis here. I'm looking for some insight on game design and I'm not getting it.

 

You talk about:

  1. What game design is.
  2. Making sure you know your different kinds of logical fallacies
  3. Some stuff about how art, sound design and programming is.
  4. Game design documents
  5. And, getting hot in game development.
  6. Oh and something about writing a book.

 

At first I thought, "This is obviously something very introductory, I'm not getting insight because I know these things already..." But there are are things you assume your readers should know (if this is supposed to be some introductory text). For example, assuming they know what a game design document is or what feature creep is.

 

 

But I like to think this is for other people who have some experience in game design. And if that's the case, well...

  1. Game design can't be "the process of what works well in a game." That is such a broad statement that says nothing about what game design is. Creating game art can be the process of what works well in the game (in terms of theme, palette, mood, etc) as well as programming can be the process of what works well in a game (in terms of code library choice, engine compatibility, and much more)
  2. Game design somehow has something to do with your ability to identify logical fallacies?! I mean sure they are nice to know but it doesn't make you a better game designer to beat somebody in an argument...it makes you a better debater.

There is a bunch more things I wish to identify but I guess its best summarized like this: The title of this post was "My article on Game Design" and the only real part that addresses game design was the first paragraph and numbered list. And that paragraph doesn't say anything, its too broad.

 

 

 

I know it was just your opinion but usually opinions are posted to present an argument and start a discussion but no argument is presented. Usually opinions like this are trying to tell people of the experience they've had and why that's true but there is never a "this is why..." kind of statement or any kind of specific experience imparted here.

 

Entire books are dedicated to "what game design is" it's too hard to summarize it in a forum post.

 

Usually opinions like this are posted to present an idea to see what other people think and not necessarily trying to create a discussion, just a critique. That's what this is. I hope my critique was useful in someway, if not, lets discuss that.


#1Mario D.

Posted 26 October 2013 - 11:23 AM

I'm confused on the thesis here. I'm looking for some insight on game design and I'm not getting it.

 

You talk about:

  1. What game design is.
  2. Making sure you know your different kinds of logical fallacies
  3. Some stuff about how art, sound design and programming is. (that alone doesn't make sense.)
  4. Game design documents
  5. And, getting hot in game development.
  6. Oh and something about writing a book.

 

At first I thought, "This is obviously something very introductory, I'm not getting insight because I know these things already..." But there are are things you assume your readers should know (if this is supposed to be some introductory text). For example, assuming they know what a game design document is or what feature creep is.

 

 

But I like to think this is for other people who have some experience in game design. And if that's the case, well...

  1. Game design can't be "the process of what works well in a game." That is such a broad statement that says nothing about what game design is. Creating game art can be the process of what works well in the game (in terms of theme, palette, mood, etc) as well as programming can be the process of what works well in a game (in terms of code library choice, engine compatibility, and much more)
  2. Game design somehow has something to do with your ability to identify logical fallacies?! I mean sure they are nice to know but it doesn't make you a better game designer to beat somebody in an argument...it makes you a better debater.

There is a bunch more things I wish to identify but I guess its best summarized like this: The title of this post was "My article on Game Design" and the only real part that addresses game design was the first paragraph and numbered list. And that paragraph doesn't say anything, its too broad.

 

 

 

I know it was just your opinion but usually opinions are posted to present an argument and start a discussion but no argument is presented. Usually opinions like this are trying to tell people of the experience they've had and why that's true but there is never a "this is why..." kind of statement or any kind of specific experience imparted here.

 

Entire books are dedicated to "what game design is" it's too hard to summarize it in a forum post.

 

Usually opinions like this are posted to present an idea to see what other people think and not necessarily trying to create a discussion, just a critique. That's what this is. I hope my critique was useful in someway, if not, lets discuss that.


PARTNERS