quote:

---

Original post by TechnoHydra

quote:

---

Original post by Ketchaval
Let us form a manifesto for a new breed of game that will avoid all of the fakery, and reflect reality as it is !

What should our manifesto be? Feel free to contribute new rules and expose the deception at the root of our "entertainment".



Rule One
---------

1. No more saved games! The player cannot reload if they have made a mistake.

---

1.) If the game reflects perfectly the reality of life whats the pointof playing it? Why should I stay in and repeat the exact same things I do in my own life? And don''t say so that I can experience it differently, because then it is escapism from the truth.

2.) It can''t be done perfectly because reality includes irreversible consecuences. If it''s a simulation then the cobsecuences will never hit us. And we''ll know that subconciously.

3.) Also to reflect reality perfectly then it has to each of our individual lives OR be random without us choosing how we start, what we look like, the path thats going to lie ahead of us, or the circumstances in that life. Therefore the start of game must randomly generated and can only be done once. That means no rerolling our character hoping it gets better. If your character is crappy to bad, you have to live with it.

(Note: This would probably only be possible in design, unless you plan to make a super-VR simulator like we''ve seen someone else posting about recently. I''m not going to name A name but I think most here know who I''m talking about.)

---

Sorry I had to repost what I put in the other thread. Seriously Ketcheval, where the heck is this anti-escapism coming from? This is a GAME design site, and this in particular is a GAME DESIGN FORUM. This sort of manifesto is something those stuck up politicians would like to have to regulate us I think. Seriously. Maybe it''s just me but I don''t see much of a point to this manifesto. I mean I personally don''t feel compelled to follow it.

The Matrix has you Katchaval. Unplug...

void Signature(void* Pointer)
{
PObject(Pointer)->ShowMessage("Why do we need so many pointers?");
};

Two guys walk into a bar. One''s an Isreali ambassador, one''s a Palestinian ambassador. They both get drunk. Then they start peace talks.

Sounds rather stupid and/or trollish to me. I have the game I''m working on set up so the save deletes after you reload so you can''t futz up too massively, but no-resurrection means you''d better have a LOT of characters.

If not reality based, it would be like the Matrix (in terms of questions of responsibility) etc.

Furthermore, check out this article for a link to an article about the Dogme manifesto. you have to register though.

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/login.php3?from=/features/20010129/adams_01.htm

this thread for discussion of Dogme

http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=38815

It seems that people haven''t quite understood my idea, and I can''t be bothered to re-formulate it. So we can let it lie, if you wish.

Well its evidently important to you. Are you refering only to the ability to replay where you left off? If so then wouldn''t it be a burden in long games where you can''t stop until you''ve finished otherwise you start over again?

If you really want to stop escapism, it isn''t enough to disallow saved-games and cheating death. After all, there''s still always a chance to restart from the beginning--which, of course, is lacking in real life.

Therefore, I propose rule 3 to your manifest:

3. A particular game will only be playable once by a particular user, in his entire life.

I''ll admit that this will be difficult to implement, requiring robust personal authentication... but it is truly essential if we are to rid our games of entertainment once and for all.

---

How appropriate. You fight like a cow.

quote:

---

Original post by Sneftel
Therefore, I propose rule 3 to your manifest:

3. A particular game will only be playable once by a particular user, in his entire life.

I''ll admit that this will be difficult to implement, requiring robust personal authentication... but it is truly essential if we are to rid our games of entertainment once and for all.

---

Let''s not compromise with wozzname unescapism. If you lose a life in a game, you should die in real-life ... or at least suffer a grave wound, coresponding to how you were hit ingame. Eg when the aliens in Unreal disembowels you with one of their nasty knifes, delete the game, break the CD, and go find the bread-knife in the kitchen then perform the operation in the garden. A lot of people haven''t got like for example a BFG9K, so I hope id includes one in the box of Doom]|[. Else everybody should BOYCUT this sorry escapist nonsense.

---------
"It''''s always useful when you face an enemy prepared to die for his country. That means both of you have exactly the same aim in mind." -Terry Pratchett

Seriously though, there''s no need to flame anybody.

quote:

---

Original post by TechnoHydra
Seriously though, there''s no need to flame anybody.

---

That''s just the Gamedev way of demonstrating you haven''t got a clue what the thread is about, and don''t feel like trying to understand it, but want to make yourself known anyway.

Not that this thread is now going anywhere.

quote:

---

Original post by Ketchaval
Rule 1.

1. No more saved games! The player cannot reload if they have made a mistake.

Rule 2.

2. There will be no more reincarnation. No ''pheonix feathers'' or magic potions should work. Characters that are killed or that die, are dead.

---

Okay, I''m game.

We''re up to about 4 now, right? Here''s mine:

4. In a saveless game, you will be able to ignore any challenge put forth before you. Save the princess? Princesses are good eatin'', Mr. Dragon, knock yourself out. Aliens are invading? Best of luck, let me know how it works out. No designer shall grab you by the back of your neck and force you into situations you would not choose in real life.

5. The game''s rules shall be immutably self-consistent. No designer cheating, no removing items from the board for memory management, no teleporting / backfilling enemies unless they could have actually gotten there in reality.

6. The player can get as much intelligence about any upcoming obstacle / challenge as he could have in the real world. This includes spy devices, paid informants, use of stealth, etc.

7. The player can use any combination of objects to solve puzzles that could be used in the real world

8. The player can tap any resource they could in the real world, including family, police, military, etc. and these resources will respond with the same level of verity that they would in the real world.

9. The player can take any action they could take in the real world, thus using their own creativity rather than the designer''s notion of how a problem is to be solved.

10. The player can join any side he chooses, meaning that they can strike a bargain with the badguys and become one, sell out the good guys, or choose to be a complete coward.

You say that reality doesn''t allow us to reload games. Okay, great. But if you''re going to enforce reality, enforce all of reality. You make me a soldier in a game and I don''t like the mission, I get the choice to go to the stockade, spend ten years, then do something else. You put me against waves and waves of enemies, then you better give me the ability to run, play dead, rig bombs, switch sides, etc.

If you remove saves, but create ridiculously constrained choices that stop players from recovering from failure, then you''re portraying a lie of another type: The lie of the limited choice.




--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...