quote: Original post by Warsong

quote: Original post by Alpha_ProgDes
though i see the point of your post.
i believe .....
[edited by - Alpha_ProgDes on October 15, 2003 1:21:30 AM]

Alpha_ProgDes
Let me correct your analogy in what I imply
it would be like saying that a game programmer who makes a fun game using NES technology is a better* game “DESIGNER” (not programmer) than one who does the same thing using OpenGL targeted to a P4 class computer “with high end graphics which gets the same game play results”
Pound for pound Tetris made more with less resources than the average million $ budget games.

ahhhh. but the point is to make a fun game. if you were to make it in the same genre my point is still valid. for example: Street Fighter II and Tekken 3. both made with different technologies, both considered fun and successful. now if Capcom made Tekken 3 with the same technology that made SF2 with than that would make them BETTER GAME PROGRAMMERS. in this case they are squeeze every ounce of power out of the system and designing the game with both the hardware and player in mind.

quote:
Restricting ideas in a practice is to try to make the person squeeze ideas more. If we had abundant resources we cant test our* self and try to make our self better.

i don''t agree with that statement only because the designer must take the platform he is targetting in consideration. so for a game like Tetris, or Super Mario Bros a 2D-based console would be a better fit than say a PS2 or Xbox. A game like Pole Position (why hasn''t that come out in 3D yet??) would benefit from an abundance of resources it allows the designer more freedom to create a better game as opposed to restrict with inferior hardware.

quote:
Physic competitions do this a lot to restrict the physic student to rules to see how creative their minds can be.

those are beginners so there must be rules in place to make sure that everyone is graded and measured using the same standard.

quote:
Just like the show MacGyver how the MacGyver shows how making a bright light with chemicals found in the bathroom. The point is you would want a guy like MacGyver around to find the most creative solution. If he can do something with nothing imagine what he can do with something, which that goes for designers as well.

lol. yeah MacGyver was cool! but the point of Mac was to show that he had a VERY good understanding of the basics, if anything he mastered it. and also he was forced to use those simple chemicals. i guaranteed if he was given a more elaborate scenario he would have done much more. but the point that i''m trying to make... is that the game designers are not forced to work with "sub standard" machines (ex: SNES, Master System). You might have that issue if you''re working on a GBA game or are working on game by yourself (remember i said MIGHT) but other than that premise is somewhat flawed.

quote:
I would not be a great game designer if I bought the right if they invented the Star Treck haladeck that make 3D realistic world. I would not be better artist than Divinchi if I copy and edit a painting I found on the net to have a computer generate landscape for me and I know nothing about art. I can’t be a great marksman if I hire someone else to do the work for me. That’s how I see it.

Agreed.

quote:
Your reason in how to be better designer is good as well. Which helps people think and some did come with good ideas in the last post about people trying to make a better pong to give them a work as well.

And the reason why I say that you don''t want to waste time reinventing the wheel. It''s better to look at past work and see WHY it is good or bad. Then try understand why they made decisions to create the game the way they did. After, IMHO, you understand that then you can add or subtract portions of the game to make it "better". You must understand your field to make an impact, IMHO.

quote:
For instance Nintendo’s Miyamoto they say works with colors boxes and plays with them to see how the game play would go. To make the red block jump on the green block and see if that would work and then later on fill in the gaps by adding story, art, sound, level layout, and more rules. If he did it backwards and though of sounds first then art and story and last game play then he would be like most games out which don’t go well.

Point taken. Interesting fact by the way.

quote:
This is the point I am trying to make that people should make a great game out of something with close to nothing and if you can add more thing and try to get more info from that and then more and more and so on until u squeeze out every aspect of idea and decide what you want and what you don’t.

Agreed. BUT! i think that when considering things like gameplay one has to have that completely fleshed out before deciding on graphics, AI, and even things like special moves. i think the process would be to build slowly/progress slowly and worry about aesthetics much later in the development cycle. rather than working with nothing and trying to create a vast world.

quote:
Some people are afraid of a challenge and would rather attack than think it out.

i think it''s just lack of understanding the process and zealousness.

quote:
But you said it well and I congratulate you and I hope you got a bit of info.

why thank you! and if anything i''ve thought alot more about the subject.

quote:
I think you can do a test but no one actually tried.

i think you could give scenarios but an actual test would be rather difficult to give, due to the subjective of the material.

quote:
It’s like how much creativity does one have in a certain type of game. If I came with 20 ideas to remake pong and you like it that’s at least is a number I gave you and it’s an indicator. If I can a great game with 1 button then I would have an easier time creating a game with 2 times the abilities.

i believe this was better answered by another poster.

quote:
The restriction isn’t to hinder your design ability but to try to make you think of what else. If you were stuck on a small sandy island and you only had matches string and a few logs what can you do? I am not restricting you I am trying to make you think more. You wouldn’t have to think if you have a boat already and a spot light to get help and get off the island. If we place your self in a comfortable place then we would not try to do the best since we gotten soft in some say sometimes.

if you''re you are developing a game in a certain genre (ex: FPS) then yes you do have to look at other aspects and those restrictions do become a necessary evil to contend with. (ex: using a Q3 engine to develop your own game with). but with game development nothing is comfortable and nothing is easy. it''s just some people try harder to make a good game than others.

quote:
Yeas I said a lot and I didn’t want to say so much at first because some have a short attention span. If you can simplify it then by all means which I have been asking people to come with something better than me because I know I am not expressing it well and that I know others can.

no problem we all babble from time to time

quote:

Blahmaster “a game design idea could seem like the most fun idea ever, but once made it sometimes isn''t.”
True, but when they do come out with the game and see that it isn’t good then they know what they didn’t take into account so the next time they will know better.
Also making a game doesn’t make you a “better” designer always since many designers seem to have fewer ideas when they come out with a new game and this is why the game industry is suffering from originality and only a few do well
---------------------------`
RTF “what abilities are needed in a "perfect game designer," quantify them, and rank them in order of importance, and then come up with methods of testing them.”
That idea seems to be on a right track in a way but are you motivated to check it out?

Creativity well u can spit ball it up in a post and ask people, but to know what is creative you have to know what hasn’t been done or done well. Lets says we are in the early 80’s and I say how about a fighting game with 6 button and you can do power attacks by doing a combination, which most will attack the idea but when it comes out people will see it and say street fighter 2 is an original game.
I said one way to measure it just like how they measure physics engineers in contests with that isn’t the ultimate test but the next best thing. Those contests have restriction and we see how creative they can be with the few things they have.

Math is logic, and math has a formula and graph, so what we need is a graph, and to see that we have to dissect all games to a basic rule and understanding.
----------------------`
Hase
You can also say what is an IQ test good for as well right? All tests don’t say the total facts but they help motivate, shows your progress, and presents to job sites what level you are in. It’s like if a game (pong) didn’t have any levels (or score) we would all think we are the best and get board and unmotivated to play as much. Also you telling who is good is just an opinion but you can be better at it than someone that has never seen a game since deep down you know what it takes but your need to put it in words.
--------------------------------------------`
Sandman
Not true up to a point. A lot of the top designers don’t know the skills you asked for; one example is Nintendo’s Myamoto. Just like the saying goes “Jack of all trades master of nothing” Programmers and artists and other all think different. One is more analytical than the other which is more abstract which these are basic psychological points.
Also the cheap free tools you refer to are just that “cheap” in their use. And lacking money is an issue, since most AAA in today’s standards take million on average.
------------------------------------------`
Grimjack
At least you understand that most games have restricting rules, which we need to create what little we have. People seem to miss out that the designer is based on his % of ideas from the restrictions they have, and not by the # of ideas he comes up with.
--------------------------------------`
Techno
Pong was not made by a genius, so it’s not perfect, which can be improved like some showed that it can. Pong was also an example and many have improved on it, which if you know pong you wont be defending it. I have the original pong system that doesn’t have any button and you play with a knob on the base of the system.
Loess is not always more you know to get less out of more measures the designer, to show just more reflects on the game.
I did not say you can’t make a good 2 button game so don’t misinterpret. If you can make a good game with 1 button then you will movie on to make better ones with 2. Just like school in how you need to pass the 1st grade then you can go to 2nd grade.

You said ”Less in not more, having less means stretching you capabilites as much as possible. Having more means you can perform to your abilites and truely bring out vision.”
Which YES I agree and that’s the po9int I was trying to make. Read my example on the physics student’s tasks it’s the same thing.
-------------------------`
Zefrig
You mostly asked what others said which I already explained. Also it’s good that you focus on what you major for. You can be a master of your abilities than a jack of all trades. You do have a point and I never said anything against it but people take what I say the wrong way as well. But you have to understand that many programmers think they are jack of all trades and mater of everything, which is not true. Some artists I know can’t program and they feel lucky to fine a programmer make the games. Most programmers don’t care and are not motivated as you even said about your classmates. I took programming and more than ½ the class left since they cant do it, but it doesn’t mean they lack creativity so some work on something else get enough money and hire someone to make the game which sometimes its top rated.
-------------------`
Apha
Eeeeek u said a lot as well LOL
Tekken is good for its 3D abilities and its different fighting style I think.
About the physics yes they are grades and measured which is the point of what I said restrict as well, the contest also makes them think of what more they can do their minds have to make original uses of what they have.
As for MacGyver like u said understanding of basics and we should have understating of the basics before we proceed to making something more advanced since if we are not good at the basics then we wont be as good in the advanced most of the times since we have to learn to crawl before we can walk. Designers have to work with sub standard machines since the Zelda game for the GC was supposed to look like the how Link looks like in soul caliber 2 for the GC. They had to scrap the idea and go with the cell shade and do the best they can for that. Their will always be restrictions.
The rest you get me and I agree with you.
--------------
did these facts answer everyone?

my problem with game design "tests" is that they will most probably not be representative of the skills you´re looking for - the spectrum is just too broad to be tested effectively. Also, I don´t see the need for such a test (assuming that you *could* test game design skills representatively) since the way game design positions are filled works quite differently.
Your level will always be represented by the work you have done, so all such a test would do is give newbies and wannabes a rather arbitrary "you´re good" or "you suck". Which is quite besides the point since they should be making games and focusing on other skills than "pure" game design.

quote: Original post by Warsong
Sandman
Not true up to a point. A lot of the top designers don’t know the skills you asked for; one example is Nintendo’s Myamoto. Just like the saying goes “Jack of all trades master of nothing”

A lot of the top designers do know them. There are still ways to get into game design without knowing most of these skills, for example, many designers are hired from a QA position. Or you could develop a successful game without using computers (board/tabletop/pen and paper/card games etc)

Besides, simply because a few well known designers don't know these things doesn't mean that knowing them would be bad. I believe it was Warren Spector who said that he wished he knew how to program (don't remember the exact quote)

quote:
Also the cheap free tools you refer to are just that “cheap” in their use. And lacking money is an issue, since most AAA in today’s standards take million on average.

I'm not talking about writing an AAA game. I'm talking about developing a prototype which proves the game design is worth the paper it's written on. Depending on the genre, it doesn't even have to be developed on the computer: many games can be prototyped with a pen and paper. Then, once you've proven your concept to a publisher with your ugly, simple prototype, with its programmer art and ropey engine, then you get your chance to develop it into a full blown AAA title. And your publisher will give you the money to develop it.


[edited by - Sandman on October 16, 2003 6:09:54 AM]

Riddle me this BatMan:

How many "I am better than you" posts do you have to make on GDNet before you are actually productive?

As far as I''m concerned, a person who created a working game with no strategy, no design patterns, no objects, no data structures, nothing standard, and a really crappy design is still WAY more skilled than someone who goes on and on and on about theories and spends no time actually using them.

Well warsong I do not get your message completely, but if your "asking" when a person tops another then I think they never do. I mean, someone who is supposely better then another person that is just a matter of opinions, even if they would "grade" the person it still IS a matter of opinions. I dont think there is something like being better or much better or such. I think the case is more in a "designers" perspective, HOW YOU DO IT, because the end results we can say are more of the same. I think that judgement can be made by seeing how they did it, and seeing there style in the final product. But if you ask who is a better designer IMO its the one who please the most of people in a certain percentage like one who pleases 50% of the same crwod of people, and the other one pleases 75% with the same thing could call himself "better" at what he does. But this can be rated in many ways aswell, there are more factors that play a role in the final judgement about designers, an example would be respect which could be more important for people then who is better. But I can go on and on, I am losing myself as im typing so let me know if im a bit on course, cya when I cyaaa !

Cheers !!!

I hope that I did get your point im not much of a super intelligent being myself (yet) . Good luckk

Sandman
Yes a lot do know and a lot don’t. What king of QA positions? No company I know of or heard of takes people based on paper and pen design, and one reason is that they have plenty of their own ideas to be made and ask for programmers. Some companies do lack creativity and rig up contests and try to get the original ideas the contestants put in. As for board games I don’t find them as exciting and I haven’t cared to think about doing that, but you do bring a good point.
Programming wouldn’t be bad but mastering is takes a lot of time sad to say.

Also which publisher listens to designs since they don’t offer a place to contact them since some say they will not read any emails if it doesn’t relate to the jobs offers they posted. They don’t advertise well on how to or the proper way to contact them and many shows that talk about game companies on TV say that its hard to get in if you are not a good and experienced programmer, artist, game tester, or you have a friend in high positions which many designers that were interviews say they got in the industry by luck and they themselves cant offer they say a solution in how to get it. Its like people in the industry say one thing and people in here say another. I am amazed at how many bad games get made now that go on the game boy advance for instance and as just as exciting as Atari games. Even asking a company to present a game they don’t even reply yes or no and some say not to tell them because they don’t want to get sewed for something like that they say. Many people I talked to in gamedev that design games on paper can’t get in tough with a company. Even gamedev doesn’t offer a solution but only how to make design document which would be paper weight. Also companies don’t take original ideas since they cant and wont take risks which is why they stick with clones so much. Many don’t even a want to produce a cheap or ready made game.
---------------------------`
Anonymous
If someone did not say they are better then you can assume since assuming … aaa u know the rest.
Also what you described refers to a teacher so many a child having a lemonade stand is better than a marketing teacher you say? Hmmm interesting lol Which that’s another example of a math game that so many don’t implement.
---------------------------------`
jamaludin
Selling more doesn’t mean the designer is better since its like saying Britney Spears is better than Mozart. There more people with bad taste than good sad to say. This is why the food, music, cloth, credit card, entertainment, games, and other industries targets the youth first that don’t know better and have the money to spend. Schools now are upset that the youth are exploited and now they try to teach them about smart buying. You can have the best product but marketing can make it or break it for many things since presentation is everything and people judge by the cover than the content. But this is not true for everyone but for the majority.

though all of your threads, IMO, have been interesting if not thought provoking. i think the thing you should do is start to create a game from start to finish.

i mean start a a completely different thread (though some may complain that you''ve started too many as it is) and begin to start a game based on one of your prior threads.

it''ll be almost like a diary. you''ll show us your thought process, how you flesh out your ideas and other things like your design doc, tech doc, programming templates, target audience, target platform, etc.

that way others can see how Warsong goes about Game Design. plus you''ll have a following. If anything, you could probably ask Dave to give you a little webspace here to begin on the project.

anyway it''s just a thought. and i believe most people would agree that it''s the best thing to do at this point, instead of posting different "Design contests".

I did not mean SELLING more Warsong I mean pleasing the big mass, its all opinion based whos best and whos the worst.

quote: Original post by Warsong
What king of QA positions?

One of the more popular routes into game design is through QA. Get a job as a games tester, demonstrate that you have a good ability for analytical thinking, as well as the other traits required of a designer (writing/communication skills, creativity etc) get to know the game design team, and next time they need someone on the design team, make sure you put your name forward.

Think of it from the company''s point of view. Any given games developer will have a whole throng of people already in the company who are interested in the game design aspects. The people in charge have had experience with working with them, and will know whether or not they are capable of doing the job.

Assuming that these people are capable of doing the job, why would they bother paying money for advertising or recruitment agencies, waste precious time sifting through applications and interviewing candidates, to get someone who they know relatively little about (you can only tell so much about a person from resumés, portfolios, references and interviews) when they have a whole load of people who they know are competent and capable sitting right on their doorstep?

This is especially true of game design. Can you imagine how many applications a developer would get if they advertised for an inexperienced game design position? They''d be inundated with applications, many of which would be from people who don''t really have a clue about game design, but think they know everything after they played quake 3 a few times and thought it would be neat if the railgun fired faster and rockets were guided. Sure, they might be some incredible talent in amongst the rubbish, but trying to find it and identify it would be not unlike trying to find a needle in a haystack the size of Jupiter.

quote: Also companies don’t take original ideas since they cant and wont take risks which is why they stick with clones so much. Many don’t even a want to produce a cheap or ready made game.

Every game publishing deal is a risk for the publisher - potentially a very expensive risk. Unproven ideas which are not easily identifiable as appealing to a decent sized market are an even bigger risk.

Providing a proper prototype can help a publisher determine whether or not a game idea has enough potential to make back it''s investment is a good start. However, even if it''s good fun, it may not be easily marketable, so it''s still risky for the publisher who you are asking to give you a couple of million dollars to develop it. Providing a complete game is less risky (because the amount of money that needs to be spent on it is smaller) but it''s still a risk. There are however, smaller publishers which will happily publish just about anything - but they won''t be able to give you as much money up front.

There are always options. It may not be easy, but the difficulty of it serves to sort out the winners from the losers.

I''d also recommend you read this. Thoroughly.