• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.

Archived

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

kill

Realistic games? Waste of time.

31 posts in this topic

Even though you brought up an interesting question, I think you may have missed out on what it means to be capable of creating realistic graphics:

YOU CAN MAKE THE UNREALISTIC REALISTIC.

What I mean is, that if you are able to create games that look realistic, then that means you can make REALISTIC "imaginary" worlds. By making things more realistic you make it more believable, but that doesn''t mean you make it "Earthly", if you know what i mean. Suppose now that you''re playing a single player First Person Shooter set in an Alien world. How cool would be it be to make the world so.. believable ? By putting little details, using higher resolutions and curved surfaces, etc, you''re making that alien world REALISTIC.

I hope that I can contribute this idea to the discussion, I think it''s important to make that distinction: that realistic doesn''t mean "ordinary"

Best regards,
Riz
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even though you brought up an interesting question, I think you may have missed out on what it means to be capable of creating realistic graphics:

YOU CAN MAKE THE UNREALISTIC REALISTIC.

What I mean is, that if you are able to create games that look realistic, then that means you can make REALISTIC "imaginary" worlds. By making things more realistic you make it more believable, but that doesn''t mean you make it "Earthly", if you know what i mean. Suppose now that you''re playing a single player First Person Shooter set in an Alien world. How cool would be it be to make the world so.. believable ? By putting little details, using higher resolutions and curved surfaces, etc, you''re making that alien world REALISTIC.

I hope that I can contribute this idea to the discussion, I think it''s important to make that distinction: that realistic doesn''t mean "ordinary"

Best regards,
Riz
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IMO, graphics can''t be very "believable" or "realistic" when we''re restricted to viewing them on a monitor. The monitor is flat; it can''t give a good sense of 3D for still pictures. 3D glasses might solve the issue, but unfortunately all attempts of making 3D glasses for games have been horrible instruments of torture that cause headaches.. and don''t work. It is strange that 3D sound has gotten far ahead of graphics in realism.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the key here is 'Suspension of Disbelief' and finding the best common denominator between the games design and the players use of that game.

I'm desinging a game right now and it's a struggle to find the appropriate balance. Right off the bat, the more streamlined in-game features that I can provide to the player the better. This way, the game is as intuitive as it can be right out of the box. There is less for the player to learn if I use an environment that is already common. So, trying to mimick realistic graphics is an automatic plus. Ofcourse, the game genre and goals of design are primary factors in choosing the graphical environment...

I hope this perspective helps your thought process.

-nathan

Edited by - Project2501 on 3/13/00 1:43:37 PM
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I saw this over at OpenGL.org a few days ago:
[ http://www.ramartworks.com/ibr/index.html ]
Sounds pretty interesting and *cough cough* fairly easy to implement. So, would you bother with highly realistic graphics if you didn''t have to pull your hair out?
. Okay a little off subject -> Just got Final Fantasy VIII (8) PC for my birthday. I tried it out almost immediately. Was a bit scoffed that my G400, though compatible, couldn''t put 5 fps out during battles. Still, I have to admire how fluidly the game changes between pre-rendered and on-the-fly graphics.
. I''m not trying to praise Square, but I''d like to point out that the flow of the game [storyline, music, graphics, EVERYTHING] is far more essential to the continued suspension of disbelief than pretty polys. I''ve played games with cruddy graphics and good flow and others with pretty graphics and bad flow. Give me fluidity any day!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK - I see the point of the original post however I find the most important single point about a game is that it immerses you in its gameplay. This can be done in three main ways:

* Realistic graphics.
* Brilliant gameplay.
* Brilliant atmosphere.

If the graphics are extrelely realistic then there is a much greater chance of the player becoming immersed in the game. For example in Half-Life, the graphics engine itself whilst not breathtaking, is very fluid and contains a lot of locations that are very bleivable in the given context.

If the gameplay is very good, a player can sit and play for hours without even realising what he/she is doing. Take Tetris or the older games such as Pac Man and Galaxian.

Brilliant atmosphere can make a game become more important than the players real life if there is enough of it. I remember when I first played UFO:Enemy Unknown. My body stopped responding to external stimulai Its the same think with Half-Life and Civilization. The game makes you care so much or has such a brilliant storyline that it dosn''t need good graphics anymore.


So far in the history of computer games, most games have relied on just one of the above points to make the game successful. It either had good graphics and no gameplay or rubbish graphics and great atmosphere or whatever.

In recent years, games have just started to cross the boundary and now two of the above elements are being met. Games such as Half Life have got great graphics and stmosphere. However, in my opinion, no game has ever managed to fulfill all three elements. Half Life for example, had basic gameplay once you take away all of the other layers. It was just a Quake clone with great atmosphere and graphics.

I that the way we should be heading is to fulfill all three of the above elements in one game

/me hands everyone two cents
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites