Archived

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

Where are all the small games?

This topic is 4979 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

It seems everyone these days is make games with the words "epic" or "massive" in the description, but why? Some of the best games I''ve played are small games that focus of replayability and gameplay. They tend to have minimal stories and graphics, but included dynamic gameplay that takes only a few hours to playthrough and are openened enough to allow you to keep playing. So why arn''t more of the people in this forum working on small games? Its alot easier to finish a small game, since they have minal expensies and you learn alot more from finishing one then working on an epic that never gets 10% done. It also allows you to get your name out there and maybe even alittle money from selling it. Oh and just to clarifiy by a small game I''m not suggesting you go out and make a clone of your favorite atari game. There are plenty of untapped ideas for small games and there is defently a market for them since none of the Major labels are making them. ----------------------------------------------------- "Fate and Destiny only give you the opportunity the rest you have to do on your own." Current Design project: Ambitions Slave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by TechnoGoth
So why arn''t more of the people in this forum working on small games?


This being the game design forum, my hunch is that you''re getting a biased sample space. If you were working on a small game, you''d have fewer reasons to post in a game design forum, wouldn''t you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by SiCrane
quote:
Original post by TechnoGoth
So why arn''t more of the people in this forum working on small games?


This being the game design forum, my hunch is that you''re getting a biased sample space. If you were working on a small game, you''d have fewer reasons to post in a game design forum, wouldn''t you?


And fewer people would want to post their ideas for a small game because it would be very easy for other people to make, as opposed to the huge ideas usually discussed here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the plus side, if they were discussing small games, there is a chance in hell (still small, though), that the game might actually be completed some day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by SiCrane
This being the game design forum, my hunch is that you''re getting a biased sample space. If you were working on a small game, you''d have fewer reasons to post in a game design forum, wouldn''t you?


Exactly! I am certainly not against small games, and they are much easier to finish. They also teach you more in terms of design, coding and even marketing. But in my experience here there''s a certain amount of visionary buy-in that you have to have before people will respond to your game idea.

Every time you whittle down the concept it seems harder to get the discussion going. Large visions inspire. I think that people like thinking big. Big concepts create juicy, interesting problems, and working out the problems, even only for theoretical purposes, is fun.

I myself have a claustrophobia problem when it comes to smaller games, btw. I''ve finished a few designs that were set-piece, one-screen affairs and began to feel too confined. Playing open-ended games has infected me with wanderlust, I guess.

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People shouldn''t be worried about their ideas stolen, heres my reason why.

1)Everyone here belives that their ideas are the greatest ever.
2)Even if someone steals your basic idea, that doesn''t mean the impementation will be the same. In fact they will more then likly be completely diffrent.
3) Years from now people will remember the best developed concept not who first released the concept.


Whether the idea is for a big or small game without proper feedback in the design phase, the idea can''t properly be developed.

-----------------------------------------------------
"Fate and Destiny only give you the opportunity the rest you have to do on your own."
Current Design project: Ambitions Slave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because a massive game requires more up-front programming, which is readily available (not entirely sure, but I think most designers here are also programmers), and the artwork can come later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
<sarcasm>I am working on a truly addictive small game:

You start with a blank space with falling blocks. Each block would be made of 4 pieces arranged in everything from a straight line to an "L" to a square. As the pieces fell you would be able to slide them left or right and rotate them also. When a row is completed across the entire space, it disappears. The object would be to create as many lines as possible before the screen filled to the top.

I will call the game Tetra ( because every block has "4" pieces) or maybe something else close to that.

Alexey P.
</sarcasm>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Because a massive game requires more up-front programming, which is readily available (not entirely sure, but I think most designers here are also programmers), and the artwork can come later. "

I don''t see what your getting at, the ratio of art to code in a in a small game is most likly going to be far smaller then a massive game.

I noticed at least one of you mentioned clones, well clones arnt''t small games, clones are clones. By small game I think of uplink or the older floor 13.


-----------------------------------------------------
"Fate and Destiny only give you the opportunity the rest you have to do on your own."
Current Design project: Ambitions Slave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who necessarily says that "smaller" games are small? I think too many games try to push the macro limits of the game encompassing an entire universe, traveling between the stars, etc. But there is just as much "size" on the microscopic level as there is the macro.

Think of it this way. A game takes place in one house, or one room, with two or three people in it. This "small" game could be huge if you make the three people incredibly in depth with a long history. The room itself could have countless numbers of puzzles and secrets.

If the game was from the point of view of a mouse or knat then the "universe" is suddenly huge.

People like wide spaces though so everyone goes for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by stevelat
Think of it this way. A game takes place in one house, or one room, with two or three people in it. This "small" game could be huge if you make the three people incredibly in depth with a long history. The room itself could have countless numbers of puzzles and secrets.


This pretty much describes Facade, which was interesting but still far too lacking in content and interaction to be really playable. I''d like to see more people do stuff like this, but it''s tricky to pull off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can check out my small games at http://deltacode.cjb.net
Maybe you''re just not looking in the right area, I see alot of litte games being developed all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites