(I'm betting this will be interesting...)
There are a lot of notions on the proper approaches to game design & creation. One that I adhere to is that as an Indie Designer, aside from the minimal requirements to be considered part of the genre, when coming up with a game idea, it should focus on a few concepts to set it apart from block buster hits.
- It makes sense that you don't have the advertising budget, resources or experience that a game giant has, so why would you try to clone their game and think you can make it/sell it better? Or even get noticed? Or even complete it?
- Given that, it makes sense that aside from the Genre's minimum needs, you focus on a few core concepts for your game that make you different from the game giant's games. Things that they don't provide, that won't necessarily work with their existing features. (so in case the like the idea, they can't easily add it, but that's not always a concern)
- By planning out a commercial as one of the first steps, you can understand if the ideas you want to spend so much time on will stand out in advertising and get people interested. I.e. if people aren't interested, then you won't get a following, you won't make a profit, etc...
When designing a game, I'll typically ask players what they like/don't like, and ask them about ideas they haven't seen but would like to. I also review common features of popular games in the genre. Then I figure out what core concepts or fixes could make my game stand out so that I can actually market it.
What is your take on all this? I'm not arguing that there are plenty of other things to take care of, but I'm wondering if people have additional reasons to back this up, or tear this down. What do you think?