Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

stop making GOOD gamedesign

This topic is 5133 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

yippee this is something i was thinking about when i have negin programmation in my beloved graphic scientist calculator, my calculator was full of weid abstract program which are meaningless to other, showing weird graphic, having odd animation and weird functionnality, after a moment, while toying with the program for myself and having fun some idea pop up, more freak than other and then go on like this for a while, as a good student which has friend i ofthen show these master piece to my friends which return me ofthen a puzzle face, what is this? what''s the purpose?? they ask, there is no purpose it''s fun i respond to them, and this keep going for a while aside of these program, i was a normal game programmer that''s why my friend keep looking at what i was showing us i was use to their puzzle face a don''t care anymore to their puzzle face, but someday i have came up with this crappy game RAYTRACE, as usual it was a challenge to programmation but i have think that the game will never success dude.... it was my biggest success ever at school and my calculator was ofthen borrow for a party (the only game which could be play with 2 player the same time on a machine wich not allow two button press the same time) an higly competive party was set everyday during many mouth until it has calm down, wow! how unexpexted from a game where everything that i have target as flaw was indeed the true strength of the game later someone came with these bloody Ti 92 and after the HP48 it was euphoria, the programming community of my school dive into their powerful line code and the kind, i was the only toying with a casio (it''s cheaper), and they start laugh at me well, this not last long, because when i have release my two next game (a a-rpg and a platform game) in less than 5000 step of memory they symply didnot understand, i have animated background, animated sprite, three layer of graphic 5 sprite the same time onscreen, fast enough playable game, ai with flocking and communication, a lot has give up programmation, how i could do this?? it was because i have blend all the experiance from odd experimentation, they check the code and still not understand the logic behind ( in fact i have use something pretty similar to assembly kind using the matrix has an abstract space to overcome code limitation), they give up not because it was something they couldn''t do in their own machine but because they thought it was impossible, and the worts is that these game was good and fun enough to them (it was also my last programmation ever before i want art school) because i did not follow them in the ''logic'' of ''perfection'' but having fun toying with the mechanism of programmation, game mechanism and graphic design (i have use letter as sprite but it did not look like as letter, ''cause of a clever use) i was able to surpass them (they still know more than me in pure programmation) a lot of people tend to beleive that previous game where better and more original than actual, but maybe most gamedesigner was like my rival, they did not toy enough with their interest and think to much about what is good or not, while myself i have just do everything which was fun IN designing without thinking about finality of the design (well in the moment i was toying with) a lot of previous game was made where video games simply mean nothing, then a good game wasn''t in discussion and there is a lot of innovation during this time, a lot of innovation was made by toying with code or by toying with necessity (mario''s design was entirely decide by necessity, he has a casquet because hair render bad at these day, he is red because he have to be clearly seen on the screen, the shirt is blue because miyamoto want the player see the arm, and he was an italian because he simply look like the man behind nintendo which has a snack and has a ''moustache'' they put to hide the nose and the mouth which are too small to render whith big pixel) let the constrain challenge the form and the form challenge the constrain >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be good be evil but do it WELL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sorry it's my english which is bad, i coming to puzzle mind when i have to express myself from scratch, not being a native doesnot help; doh....

i'm trying to say that rather trying to make good game (fun) we should have fun toying with game design, this could lead to interesting accident, miyamoto did this as example and early game was like this because there is not such thing known as a video game then no one know what a good game should be, and there is a lot of innovative at these time, that's why some people complain that the gold age has passed...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
be good
be evil
but do it WELL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[edited by - Neoshaman on November 9, 2003 11:01:22 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, Your method is how I imagine many young programmers approach game design. Though perhaps your approach is slightly more experimental than most, and your ability to pull disparate ideas together has served you well.

One of the main drawbacks that I have found when working on my own games is the expectation of the hardware I use. If there is enough screen resolution to support highly detailed images it is hard to be satisified with less. And the opposite is true, if my game idea requires a certain degree of processing or graphics power which I find that my hardware does not posess, or my current level of expertise cannot mitigate, then it can feel like the whole idea is derailed.

I would suggest that a certain amount of time be put aside for the development of new ''features'', be they new programming methods or graphical methods, or game play devices. This is a valuable means of developing a knowledge base so that ever more complex games can be designed based on capabilities and familiarities that you know.

Part of the danger in designing the next MMORPG is the total paucity of knowledge posessed by the people attempting them. Good game designs rest on the foundations you lay for them, and you cannot be sure of the foundations without experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
one thing is i''m a designer from heart not programmer, i think this made the difference between me and the other, i wasn''t try to enhance my progammation skill and maybe this serve ma well to go beyond common problem whithout even knwoing it

the fact is people always compare themselves to something else and try to aproach it, while this thing evolve from itself, the shadow of the model cut the evolve of the people

i''m trying to going back to game and i have begin study for social game with dinamic story, and i''m toying with the definition actually, but when i come to gamedev i have learn that i was deeply in advenced ai problem, doh...

i think someone else would try to learn about ai BEFORE handle the problem and try to acheive is need with this knwoledge rather than thinking of it''s own facing problem, findint some pist and then see how people made it and blend the new knowledge in what they really need

for the resolution matter, toss everything you know has a model and use property around you, let the form challenge itself and the content and let things evolve themselves and just don''t care(not mean stop asking yourself how to improve, but give it time and just let the question open in your mind, then everything could fill the gap even at unexpected moment like watching a movie, playing with a child, etc...keep lerning about everything else about graphism even if you don''t like it it''s not the point), maybe you will find the new badass style of videogames!

someone told me once about the watson''s effect which state that sherlock holmes would not be able to find the good answer if watson didnot give him the wrong logic

oups i''m the kind which talk alot, isn''t it?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
be good
be evil
but do it WELL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I made games people at school played on my graphing calculator(TI-86) too. I had a lot of limitations(speed, memory) so my games usually used text descriptions or text as tiles and objects. They were pretty simple most of the time, and I couldn''t program the things that assembly games do(don''t know much about assembly, might learn someday), but even so, I was pretty successful It got me in trouble sometimes because my friends couldn''t stop themselves...

I like designing things that are new and different, but I don''t go from scratch most of the time; I find an old game or several old games that I like, take out the parts I like, and try to fit them together in a new way, adding features sometimes.

Limitations are helpful in forcing us to design our games in new ways. But they also force us to make choices that aren''t always the best. This is part of why I go back to old games: They were limited before, and now we can return to them and set them free to grow in many different directions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Neoshaman
i was there warsong, check again , i have made some reply

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
be good
be evil
but do it WELL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


No i mean my older posts from a year ago lol. More abstract talk in those posts back then. try the post about opposites lol some peole did not get it fully but it made some think different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites