Not sure if this is common knowledge or not. But for the hell of it here's my two cents.
A fun game is a game that challenges the player in different ways and ensures the player can overcome those challenges (bear in mind, though, that a challenge doesn't feel like a challenge if you don't need effort to overcome it). What you challenge a player with, doesn't really matter, as long as the player can overcome the challenge. In the course of the game usually not one but multiple challenges are given to the player. The more diverse these challenges are the more interesting the game is overall, because doing the same thing over and over is boring.
Creating "Fun" Games
For me to bother to play a game, it needs one of these (or preferably multiple):
-Large world to explore, and the world needs to be easy to visualize, i dont want to get lost and it needs to have some sort of a structure (instead of repeated random buildings or something)
-Other players to follow, annoy, kill or even play with. (there doesnt need to be many, as long as i know someone acknowledges my existance)
This is pretty much required for me to play it for longer than a week. However, it doesnt need to be in the game itself. For example if i can show content ive created, help others create some, or compare how were doing all the time, its sometimes enough.
-A way to create something. I want to build a car/house/spaceship/city/empire. Though it should allow me to build it whatever i want, being able to stick a weapon to any part of a spaceship and have it shoot/shield in that direction (or if its an engine, create a weak spot there) instead of having a slot for each part type because that is just nice visuals for a list which tells which parts youve chosen.
-A Persistent universe always makes the game 5x more awesome as long as it really is somewhat persistent (if the stuff i do in the game gets destroyen, like if someone destroys my castle or messes up anything ive done, i dont really consider it that persistent.) though i dont care if 1/8 of what i did is left the next day, thats still a lot (as next time i will probably have another 1/8 added to it :3).
The above define whether i play the game or not. The following dont really affect it much, but its nice if it has these (of course if these give one of the above requirements its good):
-Big explosions and mucho bullets everywhere
-Cool graphics. Not necessarily realistic, but if theres cool looking high quality animations and geometry its nice.
-Fairness. If the pay-for-uber-premium-items system gives other players advantage, i dont really like it unless theres just a small amount of those players. I like it when you pay for visual stuff or features which dont really affect gameplay, or features which dont affect not paying members (like a bunch of game modes only for paying members?)
-Some kind of a story. I dont really care about stories, as i want to play with other players and do whatever i want instead of following a story, but if the story isnt very complex and you dont do whatever you do just because thats needed to follow the story, it can make the game more fun and help explain why the world is what it is.
-If the game can have higher and lower "level" players, a higher level shouldnt mean that the player is better. For example it could just mean that the player has a higher position in some clan system or something, but even if youre a bottom level player, you could be the most powerful fighter in the game.
Too lazy to try and think of other stuff.
-Large world to explore, and the world needs to be easy to visualize, i dont want to get lost and it needs to have some sort of a structure (instead of repeated random buildings or something)
-Other players to follow, annoy, kill or even play with. (there doesnt need to be many, as long as i know someone acknowledges my existance)
This is pretty much required for me to play it for longer than a week. However, it doesnt need to be in the game itself. For example if i can show content ive created, help others create some, or compare how were doing all the time, its sometimes enough.
-A way to create something. I want to build a car/house/spaceship/city/empire. Though it should allow me to build it whatever i want, being able to stick a weapon to any part of a spaceship and have it shoot/shield in that direction (or if its an engine, create a weak spot there) instead of having a slot for each part type because that is just nice visuals for a list which tells which parts youve chosen.
-A Persistent universe always makes the game 5x more awesome as long as it really is somewhat persistent (if the stuff i do in the game gets destroyen, like if someone destroys my castle or messes up anything ive done, i dont really consider it that persistent.) though i dont care if 1/8 of what i did is left the next day, thats still a lot (as next time i will probably have another 1/8 added to it :3).
The above define whether i play the game or not. The following dont really affect it much, but its nice if it has these (of course if these give one of the above requirements its good):
-Big explosions and mucho bullets everywhere
-Cool graphics. Not necessarily realistic, but if theres cool looking high quality animations and geometry its nice.
-Fairness. If the pay-for-uber-premium-items system gives other players advantage, i dont really like it unless theres just a small amount of those players. I like it when you pay for visual stuff or features which dont really affect gameplay, or features which dont affect not paying members (like a bunch of game modes only for paying members?)
-Some kind of a story. I dont really care about stories, as i want to play with other players and do whatever i want instead of following a story, but if the story isnt very complex and you dont do whatever you do just because thats needed to follow the story, it can make the game more fun and help explain why the world is what it is.
-If the game can have higher and lower "level" players, a higher level shouldnt mean that the player is better. For example it could just mean that the player has a higher position in some clan system or something, but even if youre a bottom level player, you could be the most powerful fighter in the game.
Too lazy to try and think of other stuff.
Fun is an art-form, but it does come from some things that you might find in engineering. Like, for example:
- Simplicity (add complexity only where you must)
- Compactness (that is, you can hold it in your head and play the game without looking up too much in a manual so often)
- Discoverability (fun=discovery, no?)
- Least Surprise (Eric S. Raymond says "In interface design, always do the least surprising thing")
- Extensibility (hey, it's fun to hack and mod and see how the game's software works.)
- Diversity (there is no one idea that is greater than all other ideas, so being a little liberal and eclectic can add spice to an otherwise dull dish... or how many space marines that fight space aliens in space am I supposed to care about these days?)
I think the fun comes when you are not bored, means a lot of innovation, new ideas. The structure can be similar to other games, but if you innovate enough, players will love the game. Just my two cents.
Many years ago I worked for a game company "Software Sorcery". At that time they had several games:
Sea Rogue (in cga graphics) where you tried to find sunken treasure.
Jutland: A navy simulation based on the Battle of Jutland
Aegis, Guardian of the fleet : Another navy simulation based on modern warfare.
Conqueror 1086 : A resource management and warfare game based in England 20 years after the Battle of Hastings.
The graphics were progressively better and the gameplay was progressivly more complex. But the games were becoming less and less fun.
Jutland was almost unplayable without a secret debug screen which helped you site in yoru guns.
Aegis required micromanagement of far too many entities and then didn't let you have enough control of those entities. The gameplay was repeatative.
In Conqueror they finally found a game within their game. The management of resources, the building of castles, the battles with rival towns was actually fun.
This taught me that better graphics and more complexity doesn't automatically make a better game. The story line and gameplay is what makes a good game.
Sea Rogue (in cga graphics) where you tried to find sunken treasure.
Jutland: A navy simulation based on the Battle of Jutland
Aegis, Guardian of the fleet : Another navy simulation based on modern warfare.
Conqueror 1086 : A resource management and warfare game based in England 20 years after the Battle of Hastings.
The graphics were progressively better and the gameplay was progressivly more complex. But the games were becoming less and less fun.
Jutland was almost unplayable without a secret debug screen which helped you site in yoru guns.
Aegis required micromanagement of far too many entities and then didn't let you have enough control of those entities. The gameplay was repeatative.
In Conqueror they finally found a game within their game. The management of resources, the building of castles, the battles with rival towns was actually fun.
This taught me that better graphics and more complexity doesn't automatically make a better game. The story line and gameplay is what makes a good game.
I remember back in the old CIv games the early exploration phase where your would send units out and discover the 'hut' thingees that would give you either a Civ advanvcement or a unit or a horde of barbarians that would kill you. It was the suprise that you got that made it fun -- the barbarians (you cant always win...), the advancement goodie (something for nothing) or the unit -- a military one to send back or expand the exploration effort in another direction or a 'settler unit that was a liability that might either build a city (weak cutofff from any help to defend) or try to send it back far enough to be closer to my growing civilization (often a VERY long way) -- maybe build a road back that direction as it went.
It was the suprise of finding one (dodging the opposing computer controlled empires) and dealing with what you got (and trying to find/grab as many of them all as you could on the map before your enemies did) that made it interesting.
The later phases of the game were much slower and boring as I ameoba-like took over the whole world (even on emperor difficulty level) -- when it was just a logistics game and I systematicly took apart every enemy.
So that early aspect of suprise and handling good/bad/ugly results was what made that part of the game fun.
It was the suprise of finding one (dodging the opposing computer controlled empires) and dealing with what you got (and trying to find/grab as many of them all as you could on the map before your enemies did) that made it interesting.
The later phases of the game were much slower and boring as I ameoba-like took over the whole world (even on emperor difficulty level) -- when it was just a logistics game and I systematicly took apart every enemy.
So that early aspect of suprise and handling good/bad/ugly results was what made that part of the game fun.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
