Original? Originality comes from people. Originality comes from you. Originality comes from you once you have realized the truth around you.

Don''t bother worrying about the market. The market is bought and sold and that is its nature.

Because you''re different from every other living thing in the entire universe, you can make a game that is unique -- original. Because you''re unique, once you make a game that''s yours, that''s straight from your heart, your beliefs, from your background, from you, you have made a unique game. Be true.

Get focused and get going.

Don''t worry about any other designer or game, and don''t worry about 3D.

3D is here because it puts a different perspective on things. When used as an artform, 3D allows fluid and powerful embellishments not easily allowed in 2D, just as the computer allows greater range than a deck of cards. When it''s used as a mere sales tool, well, you have seen what happens. That in itself doesn''t make the game bad, but some Internet grumps will just see it as a waste of time and money.

Be true.



==================
Benjamin Heath
==================

If you think all MMORPG''s are created equal, you haven''t seen A Tale In the Desert...

http://www.atitd.net/

Originality is a double edged sword.

An original game has a tendency to stand out from the crowd. It has the potential to offer the gamer a completely new and different experience to anything else he or she has previously played.

However, if a game is too unique, too unusual, players can''t relate to it. If you see a game on the shelves which is totally different from everything you are used to, how do you know whether you''ll like it or not? You''ve got no basis for comparison, so you can''t easily compare it to an existing product you know you do like.

So on the one hand, you could produce a stunningly original game, but sell very few copies. This game will at best appeal to a niche market. On the other hand, you could produce a totally uninspired clone. This game will probably not appeal to too many people either.

Somewhere in the middle is a sweet spot - something that is sufficiently different from it''s contemporaries that it stands out and provides a fresh experience, while remaining familiar enough to appeal to a reasonably large market.

Now, if you don''t care about marketability, more power to you - but if you are doing this for a living then you need to make enough money to cover your costs - and it doesn''t often pay to be too original.

Finally: Originality does not necessarily mean good gameplay. A crappy game is a crappy game, no matter how whacky and original the concept.

The only fun MMORPG i''ve played was UO, every other one i''ve played has felt like i was working, not playing.

If you are looking for an orginal single player game check out Enclave, at least play the demo. It can be found on google realy easily.

Well, the main reason that so many games are similar is that they''re all made by the same person: the male nerd. The way I see it is that originality is a myth. No one can make a totally new idea. We can only come up with stuff that''s already in our brain. So technically all the game dev''s have one brain full of Dr. Who, Star Wars, The Matrix, The Simpsons, John Woo, William Gibson, anime and games. Lot''s of games. So that''s why we see the same themes repeated over and over again. But now that the tools are getting easier to use we might see other types of people with different life experiences trying their hand at interactive entertainment. Maybe even girls.

A friendly challenge: You want original games? OK, make some! Let''s see what you can come up with. People on gamedev are happy to experiment with and critique other people''s work.

I''ve seen some really heart-rending comments in this thread, beliefs that are really entirely outside the realm of humanity, and I''ve seen some good comments too, keeping the faith of Good and Decent Original Design.

So I''ve decided to put in my two cents. And please, please, *please* believe me when I say that I consider this to be the truest thing ever said about computer and video games. I''m not unconvinceable about this, just as I''m not unconvinceable about anything, but I don''t think any human being can do it.

ORIGINALITY IS INDISPENSIBLE. A game with no original qualities whatsoever over another game is exactly that other game. However, no game is completely original, not even Space War, nor Monopoly or Go or Chess or Tiddlywinks or anything. Everything comes from somewhere else. Usually for us, these things either come from the work of another person (standing on the shoulders of others), or they come from examination of the physical world (inspiration from nature). There are no other sources.

We''re in an age where designers believe they can get away with producing the same game over and over. This cannot last indefinitely. But "modern" games cost so much to produce that it''s hard for anyone who is not a big corporation to make them, and they function by minimizing risks and maximizing profits.

But that only works so well, in the long run. Ultimately, the industry *is* what it makes that''s original and worthwhile. That''s why The Sims, which is really not that complicated a game, has done so extraordinarily well.

Some people here have said that originality doesn''t sell. Pish. Originality is just about the only thing that''s selling Wario Ware, and it''s a big hit. I myself have logged in a large number of hours on it. The fact is, however, that other factors are important in selling a game too. The game also has to be good, and accessable. One person here said that original games are not accessable, but that doesn''t have to be the case. It''s the responsibility of the developers to *teach* players how to play a really different game. (Used to be this information would be in the manual, and I still think a good manual will not necessarily get ignored, especially if there''s something attention-getting about it.) People also have to know about it to buy it, and word-of-mouth only goes so far unless the game is really something hot. It helps if the people marketing it have some sort of clue as to what it is, and are able to translate that into an effective ad campaign. Animal Crossing has been a modest hit for Nintendo, and I think a big reason for it was those great "Real World" style commercials for it. And the game has to be available for them to buy, which means space on the shelves of Wal-Mart and other places.

There, you have now heard my infalliable spiel. Isn''t it great of us perfect individuals to condescend to you and grant you Absolute Truth? Of course, since we *are* perfect, one can only expect such generosity from us. Farewell, mortals!

- John "No I''m not serious about that last paragraph, eesh" Harris

Waaahhh!!!!

Good lord I hate reading about people who say "I can do it better", "All the games put out today suck", "Everything is rehashed crap" and anything else like that.

Basically there are few games that are ''original''. MMOs are LARPs, RPGs are D&D ripoffs, RTS games are tactics game ripoffs (Starfleet Battles, Car Wars, Battletech) with some weak strategy aspects. Strategy games still pale in comparison to their board game counterparts and no matter how much you like Doom/Quake/whatever, if you tell me that you like it more than paintball or lasertag, you''re either physically disabled (nothing against those who are) or just stupid. Not a whole lot that hasn''t been thought up. Reality is that, since the modern fiction novel came out (late 1800s with books like Ben Hur), then fantasy hit mainstream with Tolkein (1936 with The Hobbit: There and Back Again) and Sci-Fi with Heinlein (late 30s, first book published in the 40s) and his contempories, now, not even 70 years later, book writers are finding it hard to put together anything vaguely close to resembling originality, game makers are going to hit that wall also, particularly when it''s not just their imagination that limits what they can actually produce, but the capabilities of the medium (computers) which they are producing on.

You want originality? Go make a friggin game instead of sitting here whining. You want to complain about briliant games because they have bad support? Send them e-mails complaining and let them know about it. Whining about it here (and yes, you are whining) will not do any good.

You''re probably one of the same people who bitches about Bush, then when asked "Did you vote?" you reply "Um... no.", which results in my response of "Then STFU, you didn''t vote, you don''t have a right to bitch. When you decide to participate, you can bitch about the decision that was made against your input or even about how you were duped." This is the same thing, until you go out and start making games and realize that it is ALL give and take, you give up on one thing that you wanted in the game to get something else that was more important, or possibly you give up on one thing to get 4 things that were more important. Sometimes the realities that computers aren''t magical ''do everything instantly and without load penalty'' machines just kind of eludes some people. Usually those who don''t actually do the programming or system configurations.

Reality is that you want a whole new genre to come out every few months, but that''s just not possible. The technology won''t support it, the programming practices of any time won''t be able to deal with it and simply put, there aren''t that many people who can all be coming up with completely new ideas that nobody else has thought of yet. FPS games came out when graphics were getting powerful enough to do it, MMOGs came out when the internet infrastructure was good enough to deal with it, RTS''s came out when pathing and AI got good enough to handle it at decent speeds without frequent hesitations. What is the next genre of game that''s going to come out? My guess is that the next advances will be in AI, since that''s what has been lacking most in games up to now. With HDD space, RAM and processing power coming down so low in price nowadays, it''s just a matter of time before some people come up with new AI routines that will revolutionize the world of AI. Right now, while we''re not necessarily pushing everything to the limit obviously, the facct remains that there isn''t enough power yet for us to take our games to another level. We might need to wait another 3-5 years before we hit our next new genre, but it might be next year. It might not be a new genre that comes about, but a changing of other genres to incorporate each-other. Make an MMOG that has RTS qualities (resource management, construction limiting what you can train), strategy aspects (managing huge numbers of PCs/NPCs from a central location) and the obvious RPG aspects, where you can run around doing the questing and fighting.

The point is though, genres don''t come out every year, at least successful ones don''t and when a new one does come out, it''s going to be cloned 19 ways from sunday before another genre comes out and even then it will continue to be cloned. Get used to it and find the nuances in each game. That''s what makes a game great or not. The original FPS games really sucked overall, but looking at what they''ve done with the genre today really has anyone going "wow!" when comparing the two. Unfortunately it''s hard to do the same thing when you look at the current batch of RTS games, isn''t it? RPGs have changed from text based games to x,y coordinate overhead games like Phantasie and the early Ultima games to x,y coordinate first person games like Bard''s Tale, eventually to 1st person ''natural movement'' games like the Elder Scrolls line (including Morrowind) to the 3rd person 3/4 view UO and eventually EQ and other 1st person MMOs. Where will it go next? Who knows, but it''s went a long way so far and it''s not slowing down much.

Every genre has development phases, from the simulations (usually aircraft simulations) to RPGs, they have changed and evolved over time. Get used to it and try to make a game that makes the next step, then do it again, then again and again until you''re considered the leader in innovation. Then you can start bitching again. Until you actually do something about it though, you''re just whining.

My name is Andrew, and I am a games reviewer for www.bytten.com - I am currently writing an article on original ideas in computer games which should hopefully go up in the next 2/3 weeks. Well, partly on original ideas - it''s also about an old game I rather like which was pretty damn original itself.

I''ll let you all read the article when it''s up for the details but the gist of it is that a game doesn''t need to be wholely original to be successful. I''m hoping to give a few pointers so that all these whingers complaining that there aren''t any original games out there can make up some ideas and write a few.

At Bytten we get a range of game submissions for review and we do our best to review them, not only for games players, but also for their and other developers so that they can make better games. Many of the ideas therein are clones or simply based on other games - but some are not. There ARE original games out there, it''s just difficult to find them when you don''t know what you are looking for. And we hope to get a few more for review.

This thread has been of interest to me, but I have to say that I agree with the argument that those who want original games should create them. If you can''t write them yourself, pass your ideas on to someone who can. Whinging is annoying and accomplishes nothing.

Andrew
www.bytten.com