Castle Paradox

[Moogle1]

[Leonhart]

[8bit]

[quote="Leonhart"]

[Leonhart]

Well, that sentence could have two meanings:

1. Someone who has less experience in making a game could definitely be making something we consider a NEWBIE game. Thus, he/she has no experience yet on how he/she is going to present this "new" idea. Trying to avoid cliches (at all cost) could possibly result in the game being too confusing, since he/she do not have any experience yet on successfully presenting the story in a, well, less-confusing manner.

2.

[Rya.Reisender]

I don't know why, but this thread makes me a question I always wanted to ask but never found the opportunity to do so:

[The Wobbler]

[8bit]

[Newbie_Power]

Hmm... I'm guessing one's best bet is that if they can't avoid a cliche, that they will need to just embrace it and try not to put much focus on the cliche aspect, keeping the more creative aspects of the game as the main attraction.
_________________

TheGiz> Am I the only one who likes to imagine that Elijah Wood's character in Back to the Future 2, the kid at the Wild Gunman machine in the Cafe 80's, is some future descendant of the AVGN?

[TwinHamster]

[8bit]

I don't know. I think there is a difference between pride and vanity. Pride forces the author to test and re-test their games. Vanity allows the author to say, "I made it so it must be GREAT!" Negative fame is a good possibility, though. Personally, I would rather have my name associated with a game like "SoJ" as opposed to, say, "Magnus." But that's just me. In the words of the immortal Sly and all the rest of his Family Stone: "Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks."
_________________
Peace and love. Peace and love. No more autographs. Peace and love.

[Rya.Reisender]

It sounds a bit harsh but... if you can only make games by copying other games you shouldn't be making games to begin with. Just go write a book or make beautiful pictures or whatever you are really good in.



The reason why the first game always sucks is that if you begin with making games you know a lot less about game design than you will know after your first release. There are just some things you can't learn from books, you can only learn them when you do them wrong and others discuss about it with you. The game creator will have many ideas that just don't work for the gameplay but he doesn't realize this until someone tells him. Now of course he could improve the game by changing the complete system, but that's basically like make a new game anyways and still won't be as good as the next game the game creator will make. If your second game is much better than your first one (which almost always will be the case), then your first game sucked, because you just didn't use your full potential back then. The only exception are philosophical games, where only the message is really important. It could be that your first game contains a really important message you always wanted to tell the player and your second game just has a made-up message to go along with your first game which hasn't been thought about for years unlike your first message. But then again we might argue that a game still sucks even when the message is awesome.

But as I said before, the skill will always increase until you have reached a certain maximum and all the games you created before that suck automatically. Like when I tell Orchard that I'm playing Motherland and he replies with "Ewwwww". :-)
_________________
Snippy:
"curt or sharp, esp. in a condescending way" (Oxford American Dictionary)
"fault-finding, snappish, sharp" (Concise Oxford Dictionary, UK)
1. short-tempered, snappish, 2. unduly brief or curt (Merriam-Webster Dictionary)

[Newbie_Power]

[8bit]

[quote="Newbie_Power"]

[Newbie_Power]

[8bit]

See... that's why I didn't get it. I'm just not hip.
_________________
Peace and love. Peace and love. No more autographs. Peace and love.