I think some established genres are better for discussion than more whacky ideas. Occasionally you do see innovative ideas here, but people dont get into deep conversations or long threads about them because they can't really nitpick the details. For example, if I posted on the forums:
- "I have an idea about a game where you roll a ball around and it picks up objects around you. It starts out small and ends up growing to hundreds of meters in size." (Katamari Damacy)
or
- "What do you think of a 2D platformer where you control a living ball of tar?" (Gish)
People may say "that's a funny idea" or "sounds good you should make it" but they wouldn't really go in depth, maybe give some enemy or powerup suggestions. Now if you had a working demo (or even good looking screenshots\videos) of one of these whacky ideas, and it was actually relatively fun, then people would get excited about it, but working demos are rare here.
There also seems to be a focus on improving realism and simulation on the GD.Net game design forums, and a lot of it seems to be people coming onto the boards when they just finished playing WoW or GTA or Halo 2 or something and feel like they can improve the genre. Although there's nothing wrong with either of those things.
Why no innovation on this forum??
really innovative ideas, in games, came from the 80's and early 90's.. there's not much new under the sun today. The fun part is that those game ideas still work; and they will continue to work for a long time , imho.
"GemuhDesayinah Don't interprete this as a flame!"
But we like RPGs and it's a pretty difficult to make one, and it has a very interestin problems when you are creating one. In comparison RTS are boring.
And don't forget you will not be out of ideas for RPGs anytime soon. Novels and bigger books are full of new ideas for 3200 years.
BTw what is new and wonderful color? What was a new and wonderfull color a few years ago? And what few hundred years ago? What is new and wonderful is just a part of a deffinition of current designers, not something that could be said with any guarantee.
SIMS a new idea? You must be joking. It's quite common someone would come with idea lets make detailed and realistical simulation with xxx. Sims are one of such simulations. I would accept them better if they would be an 3D RPG engine with an external funciton of being playable as SIMS. It's however more like marketing artefact, than simulation. It remminds me of a thousand toys based on SW, or an another marketing hype.
re infrmtn
Correct. It must crystalize first, or others would try to modify it to look like something they know and then discard it as a boring.
But we like RPGs and it's a pretty difficult to make one, and it has a very interestin problems when you are creating one. In comparison RTS are boring.
And don't forget you will not be out of ideas for RPGs anytime soon. Novels and bigger books are full of new ideas for 3200 years.
BTw what is new and wonderful color? What was a new and wonderfull color a few years ago? And what few hundred years ago? What is new and wonderful is just a part of a deffinition of current designers, not something that could be said with any guarantee.
SIMS a new idea? You must be joking. It's quite common someone would come with idea lets make detailed and realistical simulation with xxx. Sims are one of such simulations. I would accept them better if they would be an 3D RPG engine with an external funciton of being playable as SIMS. It's however more like marketing artefact, than simulation. It remminds me of a thousand toys based on SW, or an another marketing hype.
re infrmtn
Correct. It must crystalize first, or others would try to modify it to look like something they know and then discard it as a boring.
There are no original ideas in this forum because people are greatly discouraged from doing so. Quite a while back, I read a post about an idea for an online community that I thought was pretty clever. The poor bastard that posted it was like a cow in the middle of a wolf pack. Everyone told him it was either impossible or too similar to game XYZ, (insert excuse here). (Can't find the thread... think his name was Marc sumthin'.)
I talked with him in IM and he shared his design doc with me. It was a pretty solid idea and quite original. The brilliant thing is that it was a community where even small children could easily participate and not lose the interest of teenage and adult gamers. It was just a simple game mechanic with infinite possibilities.
Good ideas just don't go over well here.
I talked with him in IM and he shared his design doc with me. It was a pretty solid idea and quite original. The brilliant thing is that it was a community where even small children could easily participate and not lose the interest of teenage and adult gamers. It was just a simple game mechanic with infinite possibilities.
Good ideas just don't go over well here.
I believe its not what the idea is but how it's done. Allot of different styles of game (the background story/style/setting) play very similiar to others-it's whats done while you play or HOW it's done.
Games can easily become unique when you single out a certian aspect they include-combat, vehicles, level design and make it like no other.
Halo did this-it's Halo because of what it did with the combat-although when I first saw Halo it just looked like a nicely dressed-up "run-of-the-mill" shooter.
I have found that NEW idea's are harder to try and make play differently. New idea's are harder to get your barrings with and try to expand on without making it play like others in it's chosen genre.
I believe thats why there is so many sqaud-based realistic shooters- developers have allot of recources to work with on this type of game (Know what works well) and they are always trying to go further with regards to realism and options to make the whole thing play more comprenhensively thus seperating itself from the crowd.
Games can easily become unique when you single out a certian aspect they include-combat, vehicles, level design and make it like no other.
Halo did this-it's Halo because of what it did with the combat-although when I first saw Halo it just looked like a nicely dressed-up "run-of-the-mill" shooter.
I have found that NEW idea's are harder to try and make play differently. New idea's are harder to get your barrings with and try to expand on without making it play like others in it's chosen genre.
I believe thats why there is so many sqaud-based realistic shooters- developers have allot of recources to work with on this type of game (Know what works well) and they are always trying to go further with regards to realism and options to make the whole thing play more comprenhensively thus seperating itself from the crowd.
Quote:Original post by coderx75I call bullshit. I've never seen anyone being actively discouraged from persuing something in this forum - some people are overly concerned with implementation details, but that's to be expected in a community where many designers double as programmers. I've seen people say "That sounds kinda like Game XYZ" but it's up to the OP whether they interpret that as a problem - regardless of the merit of the original idea, if it's similar to Game XYZ then it's similar to Game XYZ, and the OP can either choose to interpret that as a 'there's no niche here,' or they can choose to interpret it as a 'this is another game I should check out to see how they approached similar problems.' It's something that's always seemed strange to me - that people feel they can't do a game because someone else did one similar. Was the first game perfect? Can it be improved upon? Then what are you waiting for?
There are no original ideas in this forum because people are greatly discouraged from doing so. Quite a while back, I read a post about an idea for an online community that I thought was pretty clever. The poor bastard that posted it was like a cow in the middle of a wolf pack. Everyone told him it was either impossible or too similar to game XYZ, (insert excuse here). (Can't find the thread... think his name was Marc sumthin'.)
I talked with him in IM and he shared his design doc with me. It was a pretty solid idea and quite original. The brilliant thing is that it was a community where even small children could easily participate and not lose the interest of teenage and adult gamers. It was just a simple game mechanic with infinite possibilities.
Good ideas just don't go over well here.
I'd be interested to see the thread you refer to.
Quote:Original post by superpig
I've seen people say "That sounds kinda like Game XYZ" but it's up to the OP whether they interpret that as a problem - regardless of the merit of the original idea, if it's similar to Game XYZ then it's similar to Game XYZ, and the OP can either choose to interpret that as a 'there's no niche here,' or they can choose to interpret it as a 'this is another game I should check out to see how they approached similar problems.' It's something that's always seemed strange to me - that people feel they can't do a game because someone else did one similar. Was the first game perfect? Can it be improved upon? Then what are you waiting for?
I personally never like posts that just say "reminds me of game XYZ" I generally find them more annoying then useful. If an idea reminds you of another game then don't just say so. Tell me what aspects of game XYZ are similar to my idea and what you liked and disliked about it. Then I could value out of the comment.
Quote:Original post by TechnoGothFair enough. And I do see people do that.Quote:Original post by superpig
I've seen people say "That sounds kinda like Game XYZ" but it's up to the OP whether they interpret that as a problem - regardless of the merit of the original idea, if it's similar to Game XYZ then it's similar to Game XYZ, and the OP can either choose to interpret that as a 'there's no niche here,' or they can choose to interpret it as a 'this is another game I should check out to see how they approached similar problems.' It's something that's always seemed strange to me - that people feel they can't do a game because someone else did one similar. Was the first game perfect? Can it be improved upon? Then what are you waiting for?
I personally never like posts that just say "reminds me of game XYZ" I generally find them more annoying then useful. If an idea reminds you of another game then don't just say so. Tell me what aspects of game XYZ are similar to my idea and what you liked and disliked about it. Then I could value out of the comment.
I don´t mind those comments - they´re first impressions and usually give you a pretty good idea where your project is headed. It doesn´t necessarily have to be about what´s good / bad about the game they´re comparing your project to. Every little helps.
I do think there'a really a lot of innovation in ideas over here, but as a regular visitor of the announcements forum there's little innovation, they're mostly pong/breakout clones. (with a few exceptions)
I'd rather see a concept of a super game which is totally not finished and in beta-stage, then another finished Breakout clone. That't the easy way imho. t does not tickles my imagination. I'd say go for that vision that's (hopefully) in your head, even if that is not the easy way.
And I do think that novel ideas are generally discouraged. Maybe that's because they're extremely hard to realize, and can lead to frustration, etc.
I'd rather see a concept of a super game which is totally not finished and in beta-stage, then another finished Breakout clone. That't the easy way imho. t does not tickles my imagination. I'd say go for that vision that's (hopefully) in your head, even if that is not the easy way.
And I do think that novel ideas are generally discouraged. Maybe that's because they're extremely hard to realize, and can lead to frustration, etc.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
