How to make a creative game in 2010: Ensure your CEO never hears of the game - by thiefinthedark
Assidragon on 28/6/2010 at 19:46
Quote Posted by DDL
...I don't think you understand how logic works. Or, in fact, how the world works.
"Appreciating X" does not mean "I demand X and only X"
Hold it right there. How many AAA games do you buy, say monthly, in average? Most don't buy a lot more than one or two at a time. There's not much time for more, and there's not much money to keep buying every game and keeping your hardware up-to-date (most games demand that).
So yes, appreciating a game for a single user usually means buying that game.
Quote Posted by DDL
The key thing you're missing is NOT ALL COMPANIES ARE THAT COMPANY.
This topic is about that in a way - wheter you feel like that most companies do seem to be making nicely polished games that lack creativity. :cheeky:
Quote Posted by DDL
And...seriously, FIFA? Wtf.
Sport games - like FIFA - to me highlight the point which I absolutely hate in PC gaming. Selling the same thing every year, only adding a few minor updates and not really doing anything creative in the background. You don't find ANY creativity there. And yes, I know that a lot of people like them.
Quote Posted by Sulphur
And by your logic, no one should make anything that's derivative but satisfying. Let's just stop making movies and books, because they're all just combinations of everything that's been done before with little actual creativity!
if the derivative is satisfying and is so with little creativity, why not just get the original which should be the same satisfying in itself?
Quote Posted by Sulphur
That isn't being derivative. That's out and out plagiarism. There's a difference. If you happen to think that the games and movie industry is the latter - well, either you've been watching and playing the wrong games/movies, or it's physically impossible for you to reach satisfaction unless everything's original.
Uh, what? Plagiarism only counts when you completely rip a story, down to actual names. If you just do as much as change the names and simplify the story a bit, you're already having a derivative product.
Also, I'm not ashamed to admit I haven't really found much joy in newer games. There are a few which I do like, but I generally stick to oldies that were more original either in execution or actual plot.
Quote Posted by Sulphur
So I just have to ask - whatever are you going to do once you've exhausted every single position in the Kama Sutra?
I think you are having issues understanding what I'm trying to say. I didn't say I don't replay games or read books twice, only I don't like ones that make no serious attempt to be creative themselves. A game I wouldn't want to replay isn't a really good game.
Quote Posted by Sulphur
Surely you're able to understand sarcasm, even to a limited extent, yes? Or is that too much to ask here?
I believe I should be the one asking that question...
Quote Posted by Sulphur
I have issues with being oversaturated with sequels with nary a point to differentiate them. I do NOT have issues with being saturated with sequels that are derivative but are compelling on their own. So if you're living in your little bubble in the past where everything older was fresher, that's
your problem. I have no issues with taking a formula and doing it well, or twisting it around to make something new.
Where did I say everything older is fresher? Don't just muck around, back your statement - quote me. I
was implying that there were
more original games back then, that a lot less games today place efforts into being distinctively creative instead of just making better visuals. NOT that everything that's older is better by definition. There were a lot of crap games. I only stick to those I feel to be original, which is, by definition, a minority of the older games. But don't let the logic invade your bubble world, rant on how I'm an ignorant idiot who burns DVDs in the garden while making ritual dance around a ZX Spectrum.
Poetic thief on 28/6/2010 at 19:57
Dethtool, I can't say that I enjoy your "debate style" so I will politely bow out of this argument. :)
june gloom on 28/6/2010 at 20:08
Oh, you mean disagreeing with you and politely asking you to actually answer my questions without insulting my intelligence? Well, that figures. Nice job resorting to an overused "lolwittyclever" insult while backpedalling, too.
Koki on 28/6/2010 at 20:11
Quote Posted by dethtoll
And please, don't even start with this "wind-up merchant" shit and actually try debating me on the merits of my argument.
You have no argument. Your rose-tinted nostalgia glasses comment is as much of an argument as "No, you're wrong". See? There's not even a period at the end there, that's how worthless it is.
Don't agree that modern games are less *whatever* than older games? Post fucking examples of *whatever* modern games then.
june gloom on 28/6/2010 at 20:15
Sure, but what would be the point? All that would get me is wags like you saying LOL YOU THINK THAT'S ARTY? FAG
Sulphur on 28/6/2010 at 20:27
Quote Posted by Assidragon
If the derivative is satisfying and is so with little creativity, why not just get the original which should be the same satisfying in itself?
Are you really this dense? Derviative of != the same as.
Quote:
Uh, what? Plagiarism only counts when you completely rip a story, down to actual names. If you just do as much as change the names and simplify the story a bit, you're already having a derivative product.
Uh huh.
Quote Posted by Assidragon
Taking an idea, steamlining it to the point and releasing it as a completely new thing without bothering to actually enhance it?
Quote Posted by Merriam Webster
plagiarizing: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source; intransitive verb : to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source
Quote:
Also, I'm not ashamed to admit I haven't really found much joy in newer games. There are a few which I do like, but I generally stick to oldies that were more original either in execution or actual plot.
What's to be ashamed of? So you prefer to be stuck in, and to keep reliving the past. Happens when you're past a certain age, or so I'm told.
Say hi to Julie Andrews for me the next time you reminisce about the good ol' days so hard that you find yourself magically zapped onto the set of Mary Poppins.
Quote:
A game I wouldn't want to replay isn't a really good game.
You're free to your opinion, even if it is completely ridiculous.
Quote:
I believe I should be the one asking that question...
Yeah, let's quote another FIFA example and make another couple strawmen while we're at it. :rolleyes:
Quote:
Where did I say everything older is fresher? Don't just muck around, back your statement - quote me.
, not is. Relative comparison. Your problem is that everything you play today strikes you as derivative, whereas your chosen games from your chosen era were not at that time.
Quote:
I
was implying that there were
more original games back then, that a lot less games today place efforts into being distinctively creative instead of just making better visuals. NOT that everything that's older is better by definition.
Last sentence? Fair enough. Everything before that? Incredibly subjective to the point of being unprovable. There are no data points we can or will agree on.
Quote:
There were a lot of crap games. I only stick to those I feel to be original, which is, by definition, a minority of the older games. But don't let the logic invade your bubble world, rant on how I'm an ignorant idiot who burns DVDs in the garden while making ritual dance around a ZX Spectrum.
And while I can enjoy those old games, I can somehow also find new and innovative things in the new ones or enjoy the really good ones for what they are, derivative or not. It's not difficult. It involves being a little less crusty around the edges, looking around a bit, and a slight adjustment of your mindset - something that cantankerous old badgers are apparently incapable of.
Chade on 28/6/2010 at 22:01
The games industry does change over time as the number of gamers increase: old genres can't appeal to a larger audience, while new genres appear that didn't appeal to previous gamers (hello Wii Fit!).
I don't think that value judgements are very helpful here: games change to target new audiences, they do a better job of targeting the new audience, and a worse job of targeting the old. Obviously. The question isn't how good the new games are, the question is whether you can adapt as a consumer.
Eventually new communities appear to target the old audience again (IF community, indie gaming making arcade and 4X games, development starts occuring in developing countries, etc) ... but the transition period seems like it can take a while.
Papy on 28/6/2010 at 23:46
Quote Posted by dethtoll
Sure, but what would be the point? All that would get me is wags like you saying LOL YOU THINK THAT'S ARTY? FAG
It might surprise you, but I believe the majority of the people who participate in this forum do it because they seek an honest debate. I agree a few are only interested in a pissing contest (and the truth is I tend to believe that's your case), but that's not everyone. So yes, you will have people who will take pleasure insulting you, the same way most of your posts are only empty insults, but, if you truly believe you're right, don't you think it would be better to just ignore those comments and create an interesting debate with the people who are willing to do it honestly?
Ok. Let me start. Nostalgia and rose-tinted glasses are about bad memory. It is a mix of vaguely remembering an out of context feeling and of plain wishful thinking. I agree a lot of people fall for it. The problem is there are a few of us who still play those old games NOW. So the memory we have of those games is not a vague out of context feeling and there's no wishful thinking to replace what we forgot. So it's not about nostalgia and rose-tinted glasses. Your "argument" is plain false.
Quote Posted by Sulphur
What's to be ashamed of? So you prefer to be stuck in, and to keep reliving the past. Happens when you're past a certain age, or so I'm told.
Some people do want to relive their past, but for a lot of others it's just that they have tasted what was good and have now difficulties going back to eating big macs with fries again.
Jason Moyer on 29/6/2010 at 01:12
Quote Posted by Poetic thief
For example, while Thief 2 was a sequel, it was in many ways a direct response to what fans were asking for (viz. more levels with human opponents), and they did try different things.
I think Thief 2 is example #1 of why you never, ever listen to your fanbase.
(And Thief 3 is a prime example of why the above is wrong)
Zygoptera on 29/6/2010 at 01:58
Quote Posted by Eldron
I've given you examples, I've tried to explain how it works, I've tried to tell you that obsidian has a history of unoptimized stuff, low experience with the engines they work with, and I've tried to explain how flexible the ue engines have always been, But you keep wanting to attribute the flaws to the engine, even though the predecessor was used to build deus ex.
Under normal circumstances I'd probably just accept your word on it, given that you work in the industry. The problem I have is that the same flaws in AP are present in other, similar, multiplatform UE(3) games. So it isn't just a question of accepting that Obsidian uses chimps to code and moving on, I'd also have to accept that
Bioware (and to a more limited extent, Irrational) has chimps coding too, because ME has the same type of problems- arbitrary 5s opening doors, hook corridors, one way doors, the elevators, loading tunnels in the quest open areas, spawn in AI, tripwire activated AI, even its four archetype dungeons small as they are are divided further into loading sections. And large areas like the Citadel give fps dropouts on 360 despite the use of resource saving tricks like only having signpost AI. Arguably they are better at obfuscating what's happening, but it is fairly obvious that it is happening.
Quote:
What's your personal experience with ue3?
Haven't developed anything for it, if that's what you mean, my experiences are solely from having played games made on it. I specifically won't criticise things like the lack of AA or the texture popping because they are specific resource or other balancing issues.
Quote:
And why would you dismiss it?, it goes with what I said, you can make as massive levels as you want, but you'll always be limited by how much you can put in, not the scale of things...
I dismiss it for the simple reason that a massive level, in 2010 (2007) with a level of detail that is inferior not just to contemporaries on other engines but (imo, of course) to a decade old game like Outcast written for a system with 1/16 the RAM a console has now is
not a good example- a level like that in a DX like game would not be received at all well. Also, those levels were one part of Mass Effect that got a
lot of criticism and not just because of the Mako's bouncy castle physics.
A decent level of detail is very important. One of the things AP got criticised for already was lack of environmental detail and use of fuzzy textures; again the same thing is a problem in Mass Effect, though it's largely hidden by the use of the film grain filter. That's also the reason why I'd have set AP in the near future, it allows added stylisation without affecting verisimilitude, and could potentially allow for more flexibility on sizing.
