I agree with you syn-apse. It would be great if games had more cause and effect. And the idea that there would be difficulty settings that could turn on or off the various features is actually quite a good one.
However, it is currently impossible to take this to the extreme level you seem to want, due to all of the reasons outlined above. It doesn''t necessarily mean you have had a bad idea - just an impractical one at this time. The best you can do is to work with it - build a game that is as good as it can be! Keep it going in the future, and in 10-20 years time you will be a millionaire as well as an Artist.
Perhaps some people have taken the original point a little far - I can''t see that saying ''there should be more cause & effect in games'' is the same as saying ''games should be 100% realistic in every last minute detail.''
I think it is very important to remember that games are supposed to be fun.
Last point -
"heaven and hell ultimately are products of the imagination. thus, they are virtual."
What an amazing assertion! Philosophers, scientists, thinkers, religious leaders, lay-people and teachers have been studying and discussing the notions and concepts behind heaven and hell for thousands of years. The concepts have stood up to the greatest minds in history. No-one has ever proved that they either exist or that they don''t. But you obviously have knowledge that is hidden from us - you can say without doubt or fear of contradiction that these places only exist in our imagination!
In your own words...
"more assumptions. keep trying. eventually you''ll get something right."
going with the flow
Whether you meant it too or not, the ideas you presented in the other thread came across as the old ''Uber game where you can do anything'' chestnut. Which is just as unrealistic now as it was the last time it was suggested.
There''s a famous Sid Meier quote that goes something like "A game is a series of interesting choices". What some designers forget is that the word ''interesting'' is more important than the word ''series'' - depth of choice is more important than breadth .
It doesn''t matter if a game doesn''t offer you an unlimited number of choices - or even a large number of choices - so long as the choices you are offered are interesting .
There''s a famous Sid Meier quote that goes something like "A game is a series of interesting choices". What some designers forget is that the word ''interesting'' is more important than the word ''series'' - depth of choice is more important than breadth .
It doesn''t matter if a game doesn''t offer you an unlimited number of choices - or even a large number of choices - so long as the choices you are offered are interesting .
Well, I do guess syn_apse got some point that the industry is going on in the same tracks (and theres reason for that as well) and some evolution and innovation would be a fresh wind for many. However, instead of flaming each other for semantics and attitude problems, how about discussing some ideas for innovation?
To reply to syn_apse original suggestion (and the only one(?) I''ve seen sofar), yah, I think building catching fire when using a flamethrower inside is both a nice touch and completely doable. And as well, a step in the right direction for more immersive games in the future.
Myself I would like to see a much more free physics model than what''s common in games today (but I guess HL2 will set a new standard for that, those vids are COOL
). I would like to interact with objects in game..moving around furniture (and a lot of furniture, not just a chair or something), using properties of ex, flowing water to accomplish certain tasks..like filling a container with water, then push it over and extinguish flames somewhere..same thing could be used with gasses and such.
-Luctus
Statisticly seen, most things happens to other people.
[Mail]
To reply to syn_apse original suggestion (and the only one(?) I''ve seen sofar), yah, I think building catching fire when using a flamethrower inside is both a nice touch and completely doable. And as well, a step in the right direction for more immersive games in the future.
Myself I would like to see a much more free physics model than what''s common in games today (but I guess HL2 will set a new standard for that, those vids are COOL
). I would like to interact with objects in game..moving around furniture (and a lot of furniture, not just a chair or something), using properties of ex, flowing water to accomplish certain tasks..like filling a container with water, then push it over and extinguish flames somewhere..same thing could be used with gasses and such. -Luctus
Statisticly seen, most things happens to other people.
[Mail]
quote:Original post by syn_apsequote:That''s just a dumb statement. You can''t assert with finality that heaven and hell are either virtual or real. They are matters of faith, and as such exist outside of that continuum. You speak like someone with a smattering of exposure to religious and philosophical matter (the kind that comes from reading too much into The Matrix, which is actually a fairly trite movie), but not enough broad-based knowledge to grok it.
semantics.
vir·tu·al ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vûrch-l)
adj.
1: Existing or resulting in essence or effect though not in actual fact, form, or name: the virtual extinction of the buffalo.
2: Existing in the mind, especially as a product of the imagination. Used in literary criticism of a text.
3: Computer Science. Created, simulated, or carried on by means of a computer or computer network: virtual conversations in a chatroom.
Further semantics....
virtual reality refers to a specific idea/thing. Check out Websters New World Dictionary.....
virtual reality
the computer-generated simulation of three-dimensional images of an environment or sequence of events that someone using special electronic equipment may view, as on a video screen, and interact with in a seemingly physical way
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
