Hi, Does anybody have any ideas for a good 3D game which.. a. doesn''t simulate a sport b. doesn''t involve moving about and killing things Cheers, BD.

*cough* game design forum *cough*

anyway, when you think about what makes a game fun, it has to have some kind of competition, and if you arent going to simulate a sport or have a killing fest, then there arent many more ways for players to have a reason to play.

unless you want to make some kinda of "life sim" were u run a school or theme park or something


Samith
Sam Johnston
114554599
Samith256
Samith149@ll.net

Hiya,

I see, maybe a moderator would be kind enough to move this thread.

I appreciate what you''re saying but I''d like to think that the ''its sport or murder'' attitude to arcade games says more about the state of the industry''s imagination than it does about the potential for having fun with a computer.

In 10 years time, are the top games still going to basically be move around a 3D map and kill other beings be it with a fancy gun or a space ship?

What about 10 years after that?? Imagine reaching retirement and reflecting on the fact that one has spend a significant portion of their life''s free time pretending to murder other people? I reckon that would be extremely sad.

Despite my moralistic tones, I happen to think that its a bit boring too.

What happened to the inspiration which gave birth to games like PacMan?

BD.

quote: Original post by Barn Door
What happened to the inspiration which gave birth to games like PacMan?

it went down the toilet when everyone jumped on the 3D bandwagon...

i guess thats true, you could make a game like tetris or pong, or a racing game but thats a sport i guess. or maze games, or games were u want have to escape enemies and not get killed (but you cant kill them)

those games are fun and all but a lot tend to be slow paced and sort of dull after a while. and most are kinda hard to do in 3d (tetris and pong and breakout etc) the maze games would be good in 3d and so would the enemy escape games.

or you could make a game were the main objective is to drive around in some mountains really fast and pick up gold while evading cops/military. that would be fast paced and fun IMO


Samith
Sam Johnston
114554599
Samith256
Samith149@ll.net

quote: Original post by Barn Door
I see, maybe a moderator would be kind enough to move this thread.

Ok

quote:
or you could make a game were the main objective is to drive around in some mountains really fast and pick up gold while evading cops/military. that would be fast paced and fun IMO

This sounds cool. It reminds me of those movies where people are on the run on those long empty roads across the desert and where they check into cheap motels and hope that the owner doesn't recognise them.

What would make a real difference, I reckon, is if one could interact more fully with the other characters in the game. A static cut scene is just not enough but I guess AI is just not up to it.

Having said that, I've chatted with 'chat bots' a bit and I reckon they'd be good enough for a game.

[edited by - Barn Door on July 22, 2002 6:24:16 PM]

1)Exploration games. From Magellan to galaxy jumping.
2)Adventure games. Nobody gets killed in Monkey Island...not even LeChuck.
3)Repair games. The (star)ship''s engine broke up and you have to fix it before you crash.
4)"Pseudo-killing" games. By this I mean games that have a very healthy dose of competition, but disguised in a no-blood form. I.e. economic management...i know a lot of cutthroats in that field in real life

Oh, and 3D really doesn''t have to do anything with it. Most game concepts can be done extremely well in both 2D and 3D. It''s the extremely well part where the problem is.

Hiya,

Maybe its this high level, over-generalised, analytical way of classifying games which makes the end product so uninspiring and unoriginal?

When I wake up in the morning, if I just said...

'right, today I am going to do some stuff'

...I probably wouldn't bother getting out of bed.

Virtually everyone gets up and 'does stuff' yet it would be absurd to say that everyone has the same life.


BD.

[edited by - Barn Door on July 22, 2002 8:36:49 PM]

quote: Original post by Barn Door
I appreciate what you''re saying but I''d like to think that the ''its sport or murder'' attitude to arcade games says more about the state of the industry''s imagination than it does about the potential for having fun with a computer.

Human motivation culls the space of possibilities; you''re not going to play if there''s no reason to play. Deus Ex or Final Fantasy VII is much more compelling at least in the short term than Pac-man.

quote: In 10 years time, are the top games still going to basically be move around a 3D map and kill other beings be it with a fancy gun or a space ship?

Yes. Just as in 10 years'' time, some human beings will still have issues with their significant other, or in 10 years'' time people will still require some sort of compensation for doing things they don''t like doing.

quote: What about 10 years after that?? Imagine reaching retirement and reflecting on the fact that one has spend a significant portion of their life''s free time pretending to murder other people? I reckon that would be extremely sad.

Unless I miss my guess, most games which involve killing others tend to do so with a higher goal in mind. Jedi Knight II helped end tyranny, FreeSpace II saved humanity, and Deus Ex prevented the rise of amoral beings from rising to godhood.

And even the games that involve unwarranted violence tend to present it in a self defense situation. Soldier of Fortune and Hitman are probably exceptions(haven''t played them), but if you don''t like games like that, don''t make them.

quote: Despite my moralistic tones, I happen to think that its a bit boring too.

There are other options. Empire/city/industry/etc building games are the main exception. No sims are murdered in a prosperous SimCity. So make SimCity 3D, and you''re all set.

quote: What happened to the inspiration which gave birth to games like PacMan?

Most likely, it''s the same inspiration that drives today''s games, but without the incidental pacifist stance.

Even Pac-man''s not a very good example. If you took it to real life, imagine a Jew, running from four Nazi stormtroopers and picking up his valuables in a network of tunnels. Usually, he just tries to avoid them, but sometimes he finds a weapon and wastes the Nazis. Just because Pac-man hides behind a euphemism doesn''t mean it isn''t violent in nature.