Or, if you want another angle, look at the classic Infocom text adventures. They have great game design at heart, but I don't think they'd be nearly as enjoyable without the art that went into them as well. Take a game like Metal Gear Solid, Tie Fighter, Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy Tactics, Final Fantasy 6, or Soul Calibur. look at Angband, Nethack, Robotron (my all-time fave twitch game), Asteroids, the classic coin-ops, etc.īut for many types of games, where character, atmosphere, and story play a more prominent role, I think artists ARE indispensible. It's entirely possible to have an excellent game without great audiovisuals. I also agree that in some cases, graphics actually detract from the fun! This much, I think, is incontrovertible, and I agree with you on this. At the heart of every great game is *great game design*, and if a game is lacking that, no amount of pretty graphics/sound/fluff/etc is going to make it fun. I think you undervalue the role of artists in the creation of a successful game. You don't need artists to make a "playable and interesting game" Like so much else in IT (and as some of the other replies to your post seem to tacitly admit), marketing has taken the driver's seat in commercial game design, and products have suffered for it. I find myself playing crappy-graphics Freeciv instead.) (Actually, even more recently I bought Lokisoft's CivIII for Linux, and found that the trend has continued: the graphics are dazzling, but the game is boring as hell.
#OGRE ENGINE DAMNED WINDOWS#
I used to keep a Windows partition for the sole purpose of booting up to play a game now and then, but in the mid-late 90's I bought several games in a row that had first-rate graphics and fourth-rate play, and I simply lost interest in commercial games. I play Angband with the graphical display, but otherwise I agree with the gist of your post. In some cases, I think graphics actually detracts from game play for example, I like Nethack a lot better than the graphics-based equivalents-the monsters I can imagine in my head are a lot more interesting than the cheesy commercial graphics that kills the imagination. Sadly, many game design companies these days make the same mistake: they assume that great graphics makes for great game play. When a survivor dies, another survivor has to find his body and collect all the items that player had when he died, that way they'll be able to keep playing, it will never be "un-winnable".Īnd yes, the monster not being able to see them while ghost is mainly to: avoid rushing the game avoid overpowering the monster add more "randomization" to the game (neither the monster or the survivors will know how close is the monster when he becomes physical).> You don't need artists to make a "playable and interesting game", you need smart game designers. Yes, there'll be multiple ways to escape the hotel, although not at the same play through, each one will randomize a way to escape! Is this a mechanism to avoid the game being a high-speed, rushing, affair? Great idea on having the monster not being able to see the players while not in physical form. Will there be multiple ways to escape the hotel? In the video the player opens a drawer and finds a key, if that key is essential and if that player isn't working with the other survivors, or the player dies, does the game become un-winnable for the other survivors?
0 kommentar(er)
