#### Archived

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

This topic is 5145 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

## Recommended Posts

Sorry if this topic belongs on the writing board, but I am really wondering how some people on this site run around advertising their ideas for absurdly run-of-the-mill games? I''m not going to name any names (*cough*war2005*cough*) but it''s as if some people are deliberately carbon copying tried-true-and-completly-outdated formulas for games. I have nothing against taking a nod from some popular games, but when novice team tries to put together a game that mimicks classic game designs word for word, it gets irritating to me. My Point: I was wondering if ANYONE around here has an INTERESTING or UNIQUE game idea?

##### Share on other sites
you sure didnt contribute with something creative

##### Share on other sites
Mimicking a tried-and-true game is a fine and noble exercise for an aspiring game designer. Tackling problems that have already been solved is one of the most efficient ways of assimilating problem-solving techniques that there is.

As to original designs, what do you want? you want something that borrows nothing? What constitutes a "nod"? Is it a "nod" to name a character after a character from another game? Is it a "nod" to use the same control scheme? Is it a "nod" to set it in the same universe? To use the same camera angle? To fit into a genre, market or tone?

I''m trying to understand why you would START a thread with a flame. Take a deep breath, and try something constructive.

P.S. - I think my zombie idea was clever. Nobody has ever used sleeping, dermally respirating zombies before, to my knowledge. Cram it. With walnuts.

##### Share on other sites
Well, he''s new. He''ll learn hopefully, but kudos and thanks keen and Iron Chef Carnage for reminding poobah noobah of community style moves regarding no flame baiting.

On topic though, if I had a unique and original idea in an industry and competitive as this, I would be holding my cards pretty close to my chest.

It''s like this SullVew: I write screenplays. There are probably about oh, six or seven hundred people in the entire world who can actually cut me a check for the work I do. Those people are silly/crazy/paranoid all the time about the exclusivity and privacy of their intellectual property rights, upon which all their income, reputation and risks rest. They are about as tight lipped a community as you''ll find, and, there''s an old saying that a writer''s worst enemy is their own enthusiasm.

If somebody really had a unique, original and interesting idea, they are probably really tight lipped about it, or, release only general information about it, and to anybody they tell details to, legal documents are signed in advance once the person asking is qualified as interested and actively seeking to produce said material. This is not paranoia, as some would unwisely claim, it''s smart business in the intellectual property business.

##### Share on other sites
*Takes Deep Breath*
Okay, I feel better now. That came off a little angrier than I had intended it. What I really wanted to know was if, in fact, out-of-the-ordinary ideas DID in fact exist among the posters on the board, but, I agree, it really came out as flamebait.

##### Share on other sites
Originality is not for everyone. Some people do better by refining other ideas, rather than creating their own.

That, and these boards lack a certain respect at times, and I think a good portion of people who''d like to discuss their design ideas are worried about having them ''borrowed'' by an inspired forum lurker.

Hopefully some of this woes will be eliminated when the new forums arrive and we can get back to designing in an open and intelligent spirit.

- It''s a life''s work
:Image Hosting @ $5/3 Months :30Gig/month bandwidth Reseller Plan @$40/3 Month
Generic WebHost: The Cheapest Hosting Around!

-ryan@lecherousjester.com

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by SullVew
*Takes Deep Breath*
Okay, I feel better now. That came off a little angrier than I had intended it. What I really wanted to know was if, in fact, out-of-the-ordinary ideas DID in fact exist among the posters on the board, but, I agree, it really came out as flamebait.

Well, until every game publisher requires that every design be nothing less of revolutionary, the best path to success in programming will be to take an existing idea and improve upon it.

In simpler words, we are but humble people who sit at our computers without the help of 10+ design, art, and programming teams. We are programming within our abilities, which we acquire through making what has already been made.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Also Known As:
The Number 2 Mind
Able to End Interesting Threads w/a Single Inane Post

##### Share on other sites
I don''t know of of the ideas causing your outburst, but I think cloning classic games is an awesome idea. Why not remake and refine a game you loved? A fun game that lacks originality is better than an original game that isn''t fun, right?

##### Share on other sites
What makes a game original? Does it have to be 100% original? Can it be so?

##### Share on other sites
Yes. I have many quite original game designs. At least 9 among my 15 total. But I''m not about to share them, due to the reason that adventuredesign mentioned.

I''ve got them written out, and safely kept away, for the time when they''re ready to see the light of day.

(^ that rhymed) :D

##### Share on other sites
I don''t agree that there are 100% original games out there. I think that the more you know about game design, the more you see that they all come down to the same basic components in the end, in much the same way that you can distill stories down to Polti''s 36 dramatic situations or whatever. What is important is the interesting way in which you depict these recurring elements. I think some otherwise generic games could be so much more appealing in an unusual setting, for example.

[ MSVC Fixes | STL Docs | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost
Asking Questions | Organising code files | My stuff | Tiny XML | STLPort]

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by SullVew
My Point: I was wondering if ANYONE around here has an INTERESTING or UNIQUE game idea?

Yes, I have a interesting unique game idea (of which I may well carry through with my next project) that has not been done before (to my knowlage), but people, including myself, are reluctent to share game designs in fear that their ideas will be stolen.

##### Share on other sites
Take the movie "kill bill" for example.
Basically it is about the most chewed idea ever in the history of film - revenge. Still, it is a wonderful film (in my mind), and it makes you feel like you are seeing something completely new.
Maybe the trick is in the way you convey the idea, rather than the idea itself.

##### Share on other sites
Which Brings me to another point. I haven't seen Kill Bill, so I couldn't say, but another thing is its a shame how some ideas with ORIGINAL ideas have poor execution, and vice versa. I think its when these two elements are combined you get those games that really shine.

quote:
Yes, I have a interesting unique game idea (of which I may well carry through with my next project) that has not been done before (to my knowlage), but people, including myself, are reluctent to share game designs in fear that their ideas will be stolen.

(me):If you'd care to email me your idea at EvilFish17@MSN.com I'd love to hear it. I'm involved in my own prject at the moment, (So shouldn't be able to steal your idea right away ) and, as this thread should imply, look down on copying others ideas.

[edited by - SullVew on January 13, 2004 5:23:21 PM]

[edited by - SullVew on January 13, 2004 5:23:43 PM]

##### Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by jack_1313
Yes, I have a interesting unique game idea (of which I may well carry through with my next project) that has not been done before (to my knowlage), but people, including myself, are reluctent to share game designs in fear that their ideas will be stolen.

I think some kind of paradigm shift has to occur soon. Instead of each developer competing against eachother they should compete in a positive manner that furthers game development.

People are so scared to have their work "stolen". Is it that bad though, and is it really "stealing"?

There are probably a few unique designs left. Many of those might have been long forgotten when the author of the project gave up or perhaps it wasn't possible at that time with that technology. Sometimes it is important to share, because if you don't - who will?

[edited by - Ranor on January 13, 2004 6:53:10 PM]

##### Share on other sites
In a sense, the discussion is pointless.

All the ideas I see shared are nothing like 100% original. However, I expect that because I don''t technically believe we can come close to that degree of novelty in a new computer game.

If I''m wrong, then the people who can prove me wrong are not going to announce it, as their idea would be so groundbreaking that they''d be fools to share it with a couple of hundred potential implementors.

So nothing will be proven either way through discussion alone. And so it''s pretty pointless complaining about other people''s designs. Let''s just hope we get to see some of these great secret ideas come to fruition soon.

[ MSVC Fixes | STL Docs | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost
Asking Questions | Organising code files | My stuff | Tiny XML | STLPort]

##### Share on other sites
how about the game: "make an original (and great) game" , where you get real world fame and fortune when you complete it?

##### Share on other sites
You''re Marvin the Robot. Your GalactiSpeeder(tm) crash landed on an uncharted planet, killing your owner. Boy, that makes you feel depressed. And I mean REALLY depressed. But then again, you''re depressed all the time. You want to die. Just lay down and stop functioning, and let the soupy air corrode your imperfect, metallic skin.

However, you are a machine, and machine''s can''t die. After a few days of pondering, you realize that this isn''t entirely true; Machines cannot die, but they can be killed .

Luckily, there are ravenous alien lifeforms surrounding you on the planet. They would be willing to kill you. If they would only stop running away from you whenever you near them, begging for release. . .

You''ve been given three lives by some uncaring, spiteful god of creation. Now is the time to lose those lives!
----------------

Ta da, nobody''s done that before. Have fun writing the code and drawing the art. Warning: Marvin''s continous droning about wanting to die might lead your play testers to suicide. Please keep sharp objects hidden during testing cycles.

PS: You might get in trouble with the Marvin name. Recommend changing it.

---
[[ Gaping Wolf Software ]] [[ GameGenesis Forums ]]

##### Share on other sites
quote:

Original post by Kylotan

All the ideas I see shared are nothing like 100% original.

The "100% original" concept doesn''t exist. A game can be less original or more original depending on how much novelty it brings, not on how much it borrows from other games. You don''t judge a book as "not 100% original" because all the words it uses were used in other books, nor do you hope for a genius writer to come along and write "100% original" books.

##### Share on other sites
To be ''original'' I think what you need to do mix different non-original ideas and that''s the most original thing you will get. I think originality is non-existant, is just means something that is used less often. You just have to make others beleive that what you are doing is original.

However I have found a problem with originality, that is whenever someone does something original, too many people try to copy it so it stops being original and gets boring.

##### Share on other sites
I agree that there are no 100% original ideas, but I think you can be original. The thing is, gamers don''t necessarily want originality and innovation. A fun, well polished game with high production values in a well established genre will impress people a lot more than a lower quality game that is very novel and innovative.

The problem I have with people that cry out for originality is that they rarely suggest ideas on how to be original or even often original ideas of their own. Many people will give you original ideas that are within an established game type or genre but have a unique setting or story. While having an original setting is fine, I think SullView is looking for original gameplay that can lead to new games or even new genres.

Here are a few suggestions on what you can change in standard game types to come up with original gameplay ideas.

1. Interface
I wouldn''t recommned changing this. The problem with radically changing the interface for an existing game type is because players have to learn your new interface and it will be different from what they''re used to. A situation you may want to change the interface in is if you add a new action to the game type or if you have gameplay the interface doesn''t support. Even if you game is radically different from everything else out there it will do you well to use standard control schemes though.

2. Output
This means changing the perspective, camera, graphics, sound, etc. of the game to change the way the player gets information. An example would be a 3D game where you have to navigate mostly with sound and "touch" (collision response.)

Other interface and output ideas would be to make a game that uses the control scheme and viewpoint of one type, but the goals and mechanics of another. For example, an action game that uses a realtime strategy interface or a empire building strategy game that is presented as a single character RPG.

3. Conventions
Many game genres have gameplay conventions that can be altered. Most first person shooters have health packs and ammo, most realtime strategy games have unit and building production, etc. These genre conventions often have a big effect on the game rules and changing just a few conventions can result in a game that looks and controls like a standard but plays very differently. FenrirWolf''s idea is a change in conventions. In most games dying is a bad thing, by changing that and making death a victory condition he ended up with something original.

4. Game structure
Changing the way a player progresses through a game. This can be the goals (linear vs. quest based), the physical structure (wide open world vs. discrete levels), character development (level based vs. skill based), etc.

5. Game actions
This is creating unusual actions for the player to do. Many games involve some sort of walking, running, shooting, sneaking, building, driving, flying, talking, fighting or puzzle solving. Things that aren''t as common are cooking, eating, drawing, singing, dancing, smoking. Sure the second list is more boring than the first list, but you can do this on a smaller level. For example, a fighting game where you can time travel backwards for a few seconds and replay parts of the fight that go badly for you.

Obviously changing a lot of things or starting out with a weird premise in the first place will give you more original gameplay, but making small tweaks can be a set toward original gameplay and sometimes lead to surprisingly different games.

##### Share on other sites
Totally Off-Topic

quote:
Original post by Iron Chef Carnage
I think my zombie idea was clever. Nobody has ever used sleeping, dermally respirating zombies before, to my knowledge. Cram it. With walnuts.

Dermally respirating zombies!!??
*Trying desperately to keep a straight face*

Forgive me my humour chip isn't fully online yet but..., you are joking right!?
Though that would explain why they don't suffocate when you smash in thier noses (although I always thought that was because the dead didn't need air to live )
So, if they get wet, they would start coughing violently?
And you could kill them by getting them to wear clothes, they'll suffocate!!
*ROTFLMAO*

[edited by - thelurch on January 14, 2004 1:39:57 PM]

##### Share on other sites
quote:

Though that would explain why they don''t suffocate when you smash in thier noses (although I always thought that was because the dead didn''t need air to live )

Well... that''s where you have gotten into trouble... you see, they aren''t exactly "dead"... they are UN-dead.

Many lives have been lost while smashing zombie noses under this erroneous assumption.

##### Share on other sites
Aaaah! I see. It all makes sense now.

If only they had known this on the night of the living dead.