ID:776572
 May 26 2012, 9:42 am
|
|
This is an interesting blog post I stumbled upon about making original games, many programmers could benefit from this article.
| |
|
May 26 2012, 10:04 am
|
|
Forum_account
 |
That was a good read. I tend to start with an idea for a story or gameplay mechanic and figure out what type of game I can fit that into. A lot of BYOND game developers go the other way. When you first say "I'm going to make an MMO-type of RPG", you're making a lot of decisions about the game (whether you realize it or not). It'll be hard to find a way to fit interesting things into that game. If you start with the interesting idea, it's easier to fit a game around that idea.
|
I agree, a very good read. As an amateur game designer, I too have followed the path of thinking of a genre first and it didn't work..at all. Definetly enlightening.
| |
I feel over time... You start to understand that the game mechanic is more important than the genre as you become more experienced.
I do think a lot of people don't understand that, though. Specifically gamers, because they want to recreate games they've played and enjoyed. (Which is completely understandable.) Also, yes that was a very good read. | |
I agree. However, I do think it's good to have an idea of what you want the overall game to be, which means you should know the genre you want to make. It's horrible to try and make something you've seen before though, you should always strive to make bigger and better things, not re-create things you liked.
| |
I don't know what else to say besides that I never said that you shouldn't know what genre you're making.
| |
I'm sorry about that, I was extremely tired. Anyway, I wasn't directing all of it at you, mostly just the agreement part.
The bit about having a genre was directed at the first segment in the article orriginaly posted. "1. Don't Start With A Genre A lot of designers essentially start with a genre, slap a theme on it, make a few tweaks, and are done." | |
NNAAAAHH wrote:
I'm sorry about that, I was extremely tired. Anyway, I wasn't directing all of it at you, mostly just the agreement part. the article is saying that you shouldn't start with a genre. Your game will almost certainly end up fitting in an existing genre and you will be aware of it, but it won't be the first decision you make. If you start by saying "I'm going to make an RPG", you're going to end up with a generic RPG. Instead you should start off with some interesting gameplay ideas and if you decide to use them in an RPG, so be it. | |
I understand that, but before you start on a game you should know the general direction you want to go in, and leave that direction open-ended. Know you want to head north, but allow yourself to go northwest or northeast and anywehere in-between. Otherwise you might never know what you're going to do.
| |
I think the point is a genre is a classification of a finished product, not a goal. An RPG is an arch-type, a description of common features a bunch of games have.
To aim for meeting such an arch-type does give you a list of common features you feel you must have, but with no rationale for why, or what they add to gameplay. Worse still of course, if you pick an arch-type first, and don't even ask the question of "What kind of gameplay ideas would I like", your game really will be devoid of originality. You can (and it's rather easy) start with "I've got a player, and his goal is to take the banana off the monkey", and then develop on how he does that in quite some detail, without asking the question "What genre is this?", and will probably develop a rather fun, and complete, game. As you explain the gameplay, people may tell you "Ah, so it's a kind of RPG?", as they are trying to classify it, but it's not a question you yourself need to ever actually decide to answer from a design perspective. | |
Mm, I don't particularly like mental guidelines as they seem to break when you push them.
Sometimes innovation manifests as a response to another genre--you wouldn't tell the people who wrote Watchmen to not think of a genre. It's the same for level of abstraction--sometimes thinking concretely leads to great results (Arcanum=steampunk+fantasy). And sometimes more really is better--for example RPGs where having a large variety of items is desirable. When it comes down to it, to be innovative you simply need to... actively try to be innovative. And everyone has their own unique way of doing that. | |
Which is all good, but in my post I stated it's good to have a general direction. 'OK I want to make an RPG, but I don't want to have JUST and RPG' is what I was going for. You don't want to be specific until you get into the final stages of developement. You can start out wanting a fighting game and take that in any direction you want. You could come out with a fighting game that crosses with a rpg game, or a shooter. Or even both.
But without that general direction you could get 'developers block' (see what I did there?) and take forever making the game because you have no clue where you want to be. | |
@nah I was responding to the article, not your post. You can see who people respond to by looking at the info above the avatar.
You made a good point though, sometimes people need guidelines to stay focused on the task. I was talking more about general mental guidelines that are supposed to help you be innovative, or 'make a good game', et cetera though. | |
I know, but I get the alert at a response all the same. I just thought your post was contradictory to what I posted. I'm not sure exactly why I replied. Maybe it was my disagreeing with your opinion, though I respect it.
But by mental guidelines I assumed you meant with how you want the game developement to go about. In which, genre would probaly be the biggest guideline. -I apologize if I took your comment out of context. | |