Ok I am a game developer and I am trying to come up with some game ideas, but alas it seems the well of imagination has run a little dry, so I thought where better to get ideas that the gaming public would like, than the gaming public. So basically im just going to ask a few questions then ask for some input from you, the gaming public. 1.Which would you rather have? A. Awsome graphics or a new style with some "OK" graphics? B. Innovative controls or the tride and true ways of old? C. A strong single player game or a strong multiplayer experience? D. An emphasis on one type of game(Action, Rpg, etc;) or a mix? 2.Now give me your thoughts on these subjects. A.What are some game innovations you would like to see? B.If it were a single player game, what kind of main character(s) would you like to see? C.Describe the type of stories you would like to see. D.What do you think is missing from multiplayer experiences? E.What do you think is working for multiplayer games right now? F.What type of gameplay would you expect in the multiplayer?(Fps, rpg, a mix of a few genres?) G.Tell some of your favorite experiences from both single player and mulitplayer games. Thank you for answering this questions, now you dont have to answer them all just give some input, this will help a struggeling dare I say artist with his masterpeice. Thank you, NoOsEnCe InC.

1. - A. I would go with the latter...if it's a good game then the graphics are secondary for me.

B. Would depend on the game...I wouldn't want a steep learning curve

C. Strong single-player with a choice of multiplayer if need be

D. Probably a mix for me


2. - A. not really sure...

B. Almost 'normal' looking 3d representation of character..for female - no BIG boobs jiggling about...for male - no big-muscled action heroes...and faces of either should not be dumb or scary looking!

C. Mystery or historical or plain Kooky..something that'll draw me in and empathise with the character.

D. not sure, don't play them...tends to be a lot of idiots spoiling the fun

E. again, not sure...probably the community aspect and characterisation

F. Probably a mixture

G. I play single-player games...at the moment it's Tribunal, I like Risk, Castles, Sentinel, Paradroid..there's tons really over the years, but all single-player

Good Luck!

Quote:

Original post by NoOsEnCe 1.Which would you rather have?

A. Awsome graphics or a new style with some "OK" graphics?
I would rather have a new style with reasonable quality graphics. Graphics shouldn't take precedence over gameplay, but that being said, don't ignore them either - I don't mind if they aren't the latest and greatest thing, and I don't even mind if they're no better than very old games, but there must be effort put into them still; even if they aren't the greatest, thier should still be a sense of style to them. An excellent example of this is Prince of Persia (the original). Only 16 colours are used, and the graphics are pixelated, but it's quite clear that effort has been put into the graphics, and the animation is very smooth and polished.

B. Innovative controls or the tride and true ways of old?
I want good controls. If this means tried and true, then so be it, and if this means innovation, then that's fine too. I don't want innovation just for the sake of innovation. The controls should be reasonable simple, and as intuitive as possible. In some cases it's good to provide the player with the opportunity to map the keys themselves. A steep learning curve is a bad thing - follow the good old principal of "easy to learn, hard to master" on this one.

C. A strong single player game or a strong multiplayer experience?
Which is best suited to the game? I expect either one to be strong if present, and neither to be tacked on as an afterthough - if you aren't going to put in the effort to make it a good experience, leave it off. To summarise this answer, have either one, or both, but they must always provide a good playing experience.

D. An emphasis on one type of game(Action, Rpg, etc;) or a mix?
Again, whatever you can do well. Don't mix in extra things just for the sake of having them there, and don't add things that you can't integrate well - I want a good solid game that feels like one product, not something made of parts (as well made as they may be) poorly jammed together. If you can mix multiple genres and do it well, then go right ahead, you may create something interesting, but don't do it just because you want to be able to say it has both.

Quote:

Original post by NoOsEnCe 2.Now give me your thoughts on these subjects.

A.What are some game innovations you would like to see?
Something innovative. This is a silly question, if I had some proper ideas to go here, I'd be working on them myself. [wink]

B.If it were a single player game, what kind of main character(s) would you like to see?
I don't particularly care, as long as they're interesting, and well developed. Include whatever fits well into the gameplay and storyline, and make sure you give each character as much attention as required to make it a good character. Why do you say this is only for single play? If there are characters in multiplay (and there are in many genres), then I expect the same standard of them (although I'll cut you some slack on generated characters).

C.Describe the type of stories you would like to see.
Anything that's well written and presented. Make it interesting. If possible, make it something that may not have been told before, but I don't mind the same old stories either if you do a good job with them. Put in extra details. Don't disrupt gameplay excessively to present your story, and make sure the story and gameplay actually fit together. Present the main parts of the story so that noone will miss the point, but let the player discover some extra details by themself through gameplay (The information kiosks and personal emails in DooM3 are a good example of this).

D.What do you think is missing from multiplayer experiences?
This one differs far too greatly depending on what type of game you're talking about, so I'm not going to answer it - give me a specific type of game, and you'll get a rant about what needs fixing.

F.What type of gameplay would you expect in the multiplayer?(Fps, rpg, a mix of a few genres?)
This would have to be your worst question (no offense intended). It obviously depends very heavily on what type of game it is. If it's an FPS, I'd expect to see FPS-type gameplay for example. You might want to reword this a little, or specific a genre these answers should apply to if you want a proper answer to this one. Once again, if you do mix genres, that's fine with me as long as it's done well, and doesn't feel like it's just jammed together.


Also, you may want to check my new sticky thread, Games All Designers Should Play, for a list of games picked out by this community that designers could learn from, and what we think was good/bad about them (the list isn't yet complete obviously, but should be done in about a week I think). You may get some additional ideas from there.

Good luck. [smile]

I thought where better to get ideas that the gaming public would like, than the gaming public. So basically im just going to ask a few questions then ask for some input from you, the gaming public.

Unfortunately, the entire gaming public is NOT represented by the people in these forums :-) We're only a narrow segment of it! The vast majority of the gaming public plays "easy access" games like Solitaire, etc.

That being said, below are MY personal preferences:

A. Awsome graphics or a new style with some "OK" graphics?
Define "Awesome" and "OK". If by "Awesome" you mean "technically complex to implement", I don't think the percentage of the gaming public that go gaga over this is very high. Many (myself included) consider fluid 2D to be far superior to blocky 3D, despite the fact that the latter may be more difficult to implement.

B. Innovative controls or the tride and true ways of old?
As Kasgoroth stated earlier, ALL games should have as simple a control scheme as possible, innovative or no. This is a MAKE or BREAK issue! The simpler and fewer the commands, the better!

D. An emphasis on one type of game(Action, Rpg, etc;) or a mix?
Why should any new game conform to a pre-existing type? I doubt most people care one way or the other, as long as the game is fun.

If it were a single player game, what kind of main character(s) would you like to see?
It doesn't matter: anything that isn't blatently offensive. e.g. I don't think many people would want to play a rapist, child molester, etc. Heck, to keep things safe, don't have ANY main character at all!

C.Describe the type of stories you would like to see.
We don't need no stinking stories! I want a GAME! Many of the best selling games don't have any story at all (or at best, a minimal one)!

Quote:

Original post by GemuhDesayinah We don't need no stinking stories! I want a GAME! Many of the best selling games don't have any story at all (or at best, a minimal one)!

Indeed - look at the stunning success of Tetris, Pacman, Snake, Solitare, etc. Brilliant games, but little to no story. If there is one, do it well, but don't add one where it's not needed.

Quote:

We don't need no stinking stories! I want a GAME! Many of the best selling games don't have any story at all (or at best, a minimal one)!

At the same time, though there is Final Fantasy and other games that are heavily involved in story.

In any event, though, if there is a story, it needs to be a good one. It's a careful balance between being a game with some story in it (Halo, Half Life) or being a story with some game in it (FF). I prefer the former, since I can read a book or watch a movie if I want story. But to carefully blend the two is a significant accomplishment.

As to what kinds of stories I want... hmm, just stay away from stuff totally bizarre and off the wall. While it may prove your creativity, you're going to loose a lot of your audience. Keep things within the realm of what we're already familiar with, perhaps with a few unique twists that are your own. This applies to action, adventure, mystery, even romance. What I *really* enjoy are detailed, 3-D (the literary term, not the gaming one), and believable characters. Above most anything else, I want to see interesting character development.

Thanks everyone whos posted so far, and sorry about the questions being a little broad. I have a few ideas right now for a game but still needing ideas, so if theres anything you want to add thats not in the questions do it id love to hear anything you have to say! Thanks again.

You asked . . .
1a: inovate the game first, then deal with the eye candy.
1b: controls should be inovated only when required.
1c: i play MMORPGs
1d: i play MMORPGs

2a: i love fantasy MMORPGs, but i hate the 'character class' systems most of them use.
i would love to see a exclusive skill based system based on diminishing return vs. level caps. (ie: to go from skill 100 to 105 may take the same amount of time as it took to go from 01 to skill 100.)
i would also like being able to learn any skill without having to un-learn a skill to make room for it.
i would like to 'polarity' applied to skill groups such as mage schools, crafting, and combat skills. (ie: being proficient in life magic would hinder the learning of necromancy. but, have no affect on learning pyromantic spells. master smiths should find scribe work somewhat frustrating, but learnable. lastly, a halberd does require different battle instincs than a short sword & shield.)
why cant a campaigne be racially polorized as well? just because the dwarves get along with humans and gnomes doent mean the humans get along with the gnomes.
why cant articles of clothing/armor have different skill modifiers on different mage schools and stealthing? in a 100% skill base system no one would be purely spellcaster or melee type.
orcs should be allowed to burn down human cities, and vice versa. i think it would be interesting to see these razed towns respawn (rebuild)in the course of a real world week. and what if the orcs chose to occupy instead? if the iron grip of the orcs held for a 'week', shouldnt the town look like an orc town? complete with orc name & orc npc guards?
fantasy games should not have a 'one world' currency. one race's priceless may just be another race's worthless. orcs would have no use for elven life-tree discs, but may value goblen boneshards as they have dealings with goblin merchants.
2b: (have no help for you here)
2c: if by "stories" you mean 'quests', i have this idea. have different levels of 'quests'
level 1: favors - small tasks anyone can do at anytime to gain a favorable response from a npc. more than one favor maybe needed to gain the desireable npc response.
level 2: tasks - event oriented tasks that more than one player achieve succesfully within a given time. ie: the orcs are attacking within an hour, make a score of arrows & deliver to the defending guards.
level 3: short quests - a task that only one player/group can complete within an hour or two of playing. ie: thieves have attacked a caravan & made off with a holy book destined for a local temple. track down the thieves and return this work.
level 4: extended quest - (you get the idea)
2d: maturity.
2e: social interaction. the ability to make a name for ones self.
2f: MMORPGs and FPSs evolved differently for good reasons. to muck with that is to invite disaster. success would be highly unlikely, but not impossible.
2g: until 'horizons' made crafting more work than my day job, i did like my character who was both cleric & mage.

Here are answers for some of the questions:

1.Which would you rather have?
A. Awsome graphics or a new style with some "OK" graphics?
Awesome old school graphics. With old school I mean a surreal, even artistic style similar to old adventure games such as Beneath a Steel Sky or the two first Monkey Island games — not the silly cartoony look of the third Monkey Island game one nor seemingly photorealistic graphics that both seem to be pop nowadays. Yuck. Personally I'd like to see, say, Doom III quality graphics (referring to quality from a technical point of view, i.e. using pixel shaders to death and what have you), but with an isometric projection (or even with a military or cabinet projection) and the feel of the old, surreal style. I still think Divine Divinity is the most beautiful game I've ever seen.

B. Innovative controls or the tride and true ways of old?
Good controls with appropriate degree of directness. Unfortunately the "tried and true" aren't always too appropriate, at least in my not-so-humble opinion. If innovation means in an ironical way "rediscover the power of the keyboard in this cruel world of wave and grunt (i.e. point and click)", I'll take that. If innovation means "use speech recognition for determining the hymns the player chants and then use that for input", I'll pass.

D. An emphasis on one type of game(Action, Rpg, etc;) or a mix?
I would rather have such categorizations abolished. Instead, make a good game and then let the public determine in which box they put it in. With that in mind, I'd prefer roguelike games — rpgish games focusing on gameplay, replayability, and leaving some room for the player's imagination (i.e. not shovelling a fixed, pre-written plot down the player's throat).

2.Now give me your thoughts on these subjects.
A.What are some game innovations you would like to see?
Without getting into debate whether these are innovative (as in something never seen before), here are a couple of thoughts that aren't used as often as they "should" have:

Non-linear non-deterministic worlds. Walking the stairs up in the highest floor will get you to the lowest floor. The door in the basement will take you to different rooms when you go through it several times. You can simulate getting lost in a forest by putting the player secretly in an adjacent forest area. Make the game world as exciting as the art of MC Escher.

Subjective representation of the game; seeing the game as filtered by the main character. I don't mean first person, obviously — I'm talking about a philosophical viewpoint here. I mean that if a the player character thinks he is seeing a demon when an angel approaches him, the player should see an demon, not an angel. If the player character believes in evil lords of the oblivion, then, by golly, the player should see the world as if such entities did exist and the player should even be led to believe that such entities exist in the game world, even if they didn't. The player should not be omniscient and see things objectively, as very often happens. This could lead to interesting multiplayer aspects as well.

B.If it were a single player game, what kind of main character(s) would you like to see?
Antiheroes. If it was a game where the player controlled one character only, there should be complete control over the personality of that character. The game shouldn't dictate the personality as in "you are the physical manifestation of all virtues — the saviour of worlds" and just hope you don't mind. In the case of having several characters it's probably not as bad.

C.Describe the type of stories you would like to see.
Emergent stories. That is, forget about the story and make a good, consistent game. If it is consistent enough, and the player is willing to believe, the player's brain will fill in the missing bits and you get yourself a nice, unique story.

Quote:

Original post by Grim [wisdom]

I'd very much like to see more of the things you're talking about there. Games with a well presented, beautiful, and artistic style, rather than simply going for either super-realism or a rather generic cartoony style.

Emergent stories in particular is one I think more people should pay attention to. Don't get me wrong, I like a good pre-written storyline when it's in it's place, but often it's good to just put in enough details to get the imagination going, as the player is much more likely to be immersed and entertained by what thier own mind creates than by a clumsily displayed storyline, which in all likelyhood disrupts gameplay to be displayed at some points.