What makes a good game

Member
Posts: 567
Joined: 2004.07
Post: #1
I recently tracked down an old game that I happened to like, called Gravitass That I fond to be extremely addicting. This is a game about time traveling Nuns who rescue doomed people on ships. They travel in anything from trucks to cabs, which can hover, and have only six minutes to rescue as much as twenty people. Sounds difficult, right? wrong. you have virtually unlimited time, because once you get back to base with your passengers, you can start over again. This is potentially tricky, because one has to watch out, or they will bump into themselves. Add in power-ups, such as the electro-bunjey, and simple goals, such as me getting the "guppy". This was programed extremely well, and it is a great game for only $10. Smile

Other addicting games that i found, which I /Can't/ track down, like the original Super Mario world. for Classic. I spent hours in front of this game, hoping to get on the third level (I never succeeded) small, but well put together games like these, are the best games on the market. You don't need an FPS, or an incredible engine, to create a successful game. It's sort of like Mac VS. Windows: Windows apps usually have lots of options, but are poorly built, while macs have less, but are built solid.

Have fun,

-Nayr Yeliab

It's not magic, it's Ruby.
Quote this message in a reply
rossum
Unregistered
 
Post: #2
Yeah i'm sure everyone has "that game" Which is addictive, cheap and underrated that hooked you for hours with 8 bit graphics or even less, which deffinately illustrates the fact that it's all about the game play and not the graphics and sfx. It's the same reason i spent hours drawing mazes and primitive dungeon quest game is school in the eigth grade or playing chess or playing "who ever steps on the floor first is the loser" back in grade school. It's also the same reason i still would watch jason and the argonauts and not the phantom menace or any old school flick, because most things now "look real", but not "feel real". I think people always tend to latch on to the newest and the latest assumeing thats what makes them happy, which is natural, I'm not typeing this on my old c64. Iguess i think it's weird that when i have kids they will never know, nor understand, what an atari is or how much it changed my life. Any-hoo that's my two cents on something i'm sure most of us understand.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 64
Joined: 2005.06
Post: #3
I have a game I loved, but can't find, or even name anymore. It was a game where you had to pack a briefcase with many odd-shaped items. You had to fit all the items in the briefcase, but they would only all fit one way. I miss that game.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 339
Joined: 2004.07
Post: #4
Justin Brimm Wrote:I have a game I loved, but can't find, or even name anymore. It was a game where you had to pack a briefcase with many odd-shaped items. You had to fit all the items in the briefcase, but they would only all fit one way. I miss that game.

I miss Diablo too.

Justin Ficarrotta
http://www.justinfic.com
"It is better to be The Man than to work for The Man." - Alexander Seropian
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 715
Joined: 2003.04
Post: #5
rossum Wrote:I guess i think it's weird that when i have kids they will never know, nor understand, what an atari is or how much it changed my life. Any-hoo that's my two cents on something i'm sure most of us understand.

Download an emulator today. My daughter is 3, she knows what an Atari is, and knows what Pitfall is, and Yar's Revenge, and Space Invaders, and can recognize Mario, Donkey Kong and Pac-Man, even their theme songs thanks to remixed versions we listen too. She spent most of this week playing Space Harrier, Space Gun, and Gauntlet in MacMame. They've recently re-release a bunch of old Atari games in self contained battery devouring joystick contraptions. So have no fear, your future children can know the wonders of the crusty rusty age of video games.

As far as Gravitass, what ever happened to Ben Mitchell the developer? His site has been over quota for over a year and he seems to have disappeared. His Tactical Aerial Combat app was wicked cool, I love the meshwork to vector graphic effects.

Back on topic, each of us has our own "What makes a fun game.", thats not only true for developers, but for game players too. The success of card games baffles me, I can't imagine spending a minute playing one, much less making one.

Some games aren't even about fun as much as being an enjoyable way to pass the time, keeping the hands and brain out of trouble or boredom. The games publishing industry doesn't seem to concern itself with whats fun for the user, or fun for the developer very much, they publish based on some convoluted analysis of how much return on investment they can get. While we independents tend to make games based on what is fun for us, what we want to play, and what direction we want to take our skills.

There definately is no instant recipe for fun, it takes all kinds of players and developers to make games.
Quote this message in a reply
rossum
Unregistered
 
Post: #6
igame3d Wrote:My daughter is 3, she knows what an Atari is, and knows what Pitfall is, and Yar's Revenge, and Space Invaders, and can recognize Mario, Donkey Kong and Pac-Man, even their theme songs thanks to remixed versions we listen too. She spent most of this week playing Space Harrier, Space Gun, and Gauntlet in MacMame. They've recently re-release a bunch of old Atari games in self contained battery devouring joystick contraptions. So have no fear, your future children can know the wonders of the crusty rusty age of video games.
I stand corrected, i guess my point was that i think kids are always made to think that if it's old it's no good, while your daughter is obviously intelligent, i think she is in the minotity. Old games won't go a way, just like comics won't go away, but i think the people interested will decrese, comics in the 50's had print runs in the millions, now they are in the thousands.
Quote this message in a reply
DM6
Unregistered
 
Post: #7
I'm not sure that a recipe for fun exists, but if it does, I'm positive that such a recipe would be all about diversifying and making cohesive the different levels of interaction in a game. A game with two enemies interacting with a player is more likely to be fun than a game with one enemy, and a game where the two enemies interact with each other AND with the player should (independently of how the game is produced) be more fun still. A major key to creating fun is putting interesting interaction between as many game elements as possible.
What I think is so cool about early games is that the level of detail in their graphics was balanced with the amount of interaction in the gameplay, a trend which, needless to say, is completely ignored by major publishers nowadays, from which we mostly see painted-up versions of older games with little development on their gameplay.
Big business in games tends to exploit the computer's ability to handle game elements on a large scale (particle effects are what come to my mind in terms of a metaphor for this), but takes little care in developing more detailed and interesting physical and strategic relationships between game elements (the part that takes thought). I think this is our job.

Duncan
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 916
Joined: 2002.10
Post: #8
DM6 Wrote:I'm not sure that a recipe for fun exists, but if it does, I'm positive that such a recipe would be all about diversifying and making cohesive the different levels of interaction in a game.
and not be a crack addicting game like tetris that is very repetitive.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 749
Joined: 2003.01
Post: #9
this is a pretty cool topic: I am sure you could find the basic ideas that make a game playable to some extent: at that point if you are really cool you cold implement it programming a "random game generator" (!!!)

1) The player has to interact with the game, i.e. there must be some input with wich he can change something

2) The situation has to evolve over time

3) THere should be some goal

4) There must be something as a good move and a bad move, it nust be possible to win or lose

Hmm... these things are pretty obvious actually...



But I guess you could actually try to make a "random 2D arcade game generator"...

©h€ck øut µy stuƒƒ åt ragdollsoft.com
New game in development Rubber Ninjas - Mac Games Downloads
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 916
Joined: 2002.10
Post: #10
Najdorf Wrote:1) The player has to interact with the game, i.e. there must be some input with wich he can change something
otherwise it would be a movie
Quote:2) The situation has to evolve over time

otherwise it would be a single frame, and that would be a picture
Quote:3) There should be some goal

I guess you sure showed maxis wrong
Quote:4) There must be something as a good move and a bad move, it nust be possible to win or lose

see previous answer
Quote this message in a reply
DM6
Unregistered
 
Post: #11
Skyhawk, I'll say it once. Shut the hell up. This may prove my last post here at iDG, and I wouldn't waste forum space on this if you weren't being such a smartassed little wank, but I can assure you that nobody cares about your uptight retorts to our _opinions_. Why don't you say something constructive for a change, and stop worrying about being right all the time? It makes you act like a jerk.

-Duncan
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 715
Joined: 2003.04
Post: #12
Thats putting it nicely. Grin
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 916
Joined: 2002.10
Post: #13
DM6 Wrote:Skyhawk, I'll say it once. Shut the hell up. This may prove my last post here at iDG, and I wouldn't waste forum space on this if you weren't being such a smartassed little wank, but I can assure you that nobody cares about your uptight retorts to our _opinions_. Why don't you say something constructive for a change, and stop worrying about being right all the time? It makes you act like a jerk.

-Duncan
Blink
He was trying to say that a a good game should have this, and I was providing a valid counter-example.

But your little criticism sure showed me how I was wrong. Rolleyes
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 608
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #14
Indeed, skyhawk's points are very valid.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 771
Joined: 2003.04
Post: #15
[Off topic ...?] LOL [/Off topic]
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Any good game making tools? Sambo110 7 8,074 Jul 5, 2007 12:28 AM
Last Post: KnightRaider
  Making a game good enough for the major portals. BasilStudio 8 4,094 Sep 7, 2006 10:59 AM
Last Post: Yoda
  Why good ideas beat good graphics BeyondCloister 38 15,719 Jun 6, 2005 09:38 AM
Last Post: Dan Potter
  Wanted: Good idea for a physics based game. Skorche 16 8,027 Jan 15, 2004 11:49 AM
Last Post: whogben