Hello Makuto

I've had similar expieriences with what you are describing and asking.

In fact my first post brings it up to a certain degree:

My ideas were developing to some extent since about 2001. They took a sudden halt when I found a game that had almost all of the things I originally sought after while designing and conceptualizing. I no longer felt the need to develop a game with some concepts which weren't mainstream due to this game. That game was Fable, with its announcement my ideas seemed to have been played out closely enough. A lot of the things I had wished for were coming into the industry in one form or another so why should I keep developing them? Others would eventually think of everything I had so why not sit back and enjoy it right? I didn't feel cheated or bitter as some would think when it was released, I was glad I could enjoy the things I wanted for so long.

Like you said, theres nothing wrong with seeing where other similar games succeeded or where they were lacking. I mentioned this too within my first post:

After playing Fable (and eventually all of its successors) I realized the experience was satisfying but didn't quite quench my thirst. It added loads for me to build on and furthered many of my original concept. Yet, I still felt I had more to offer.

The things you feel were done correctly can be implemented within your design, built/expanded on, and ultimately (ideally I should say) you will further innovate (or at the very least tailor to your liking) what others have already proven to be a good concept. If you feel something was lacking and could be improved, that there is your motivation. It will be the reason for exposing yourself to similar concepts to begin with. As everyone has unanimously agreed, exposure and experience with things similiar to what you have envisioned/wish to create is one of the ultimate tools. If you know where others have failed and where they have succeeded you get a clearer web/map of what you should/shouldn't do.

Hope this proves useful,

Sin ?§•??§?

Thanks for all the replies!

Anri, on your experiment with Jaws: This is similar to what Mr. Schell says in The Art of Game Design: when looking for an original game idea, don't look to games, but look to your own experiences and other forms of media.

I suppose it comes to what wheels you really need to reinvent, like LorenzoGatti was saying about the very fine points of graphics for side scrolling shooters. After all, a large amount of FPS games take what the competition/previous games did and improve on one point of it.

SinisterPride & StarbaseCitdatel: I think I've had a similar experience when I thought of a game that ended up very similar to Skyrim & the other Elder Scrolls games. After finally playing Morrowind and Oblivion, my idea shares quite a few similarities but the general feel of the game would be drastically different.

If it is difficult to find a game similar to your idea, should you jump on that idea? (example: three years ago you wouldn't find many voxel sandbox games)

I think you answered your own question quite well with your quote.

when looking for an original game idea, don't look to games, but look to your own experiences and other forms of media.

When there is no relatable content within the genre of media you're examining its best to look elsewhere (other forms of media) as well as within your own experiences.

Da Vinci found motivation in everything he witnessed and examined. This day and age we are jaded due to all the information that is readily available. We shouldn't have to look beyond ourselves to find inspiration in what we observe and experience.

[quote name='SinisterPride' timestamp='1358733936' post='5023728']
When there is no relatable content within the genre of media you're examining its best to look elsewhere (other forms of media) as well as within your own experiences.
[/quote] This is a good pointer. You should also try and limit the amount of things you share similar with games, and maybe increase similarity with other, more matured, mediums such as writing and board games. For example, the majority of RPG's and action games pit the player character into some sort of archetypal role (i.e. hero, general, killer, soldier, badass, adventurer, etc.) or a combination of these, and most games' storylines and mechanics (at least in today's AAA market) are nothing more than primitive. Sure you have notable exceptions, like BioShock, Portal, and Dishonored, who themselves have flaws, but they are drowned out by the primitive story lines like Call of Duty, Fable, Crysis, Battlefield, Medal of Honor, Assassins Creed, World of Warcraft, Tomb Raider, and the list goes on. Yes, these are great games, but their stories and mechanics are all similar, and all primitive. How many bestselling novels are about a soldier embarking on a Michael Bay bro-tastic explosion festival in Iraq? An adolescent hero that goes to a "hero academy" and has to defeat a big bad guy? An assassin that goes back in time and kills people? If my point isn't clear, what I'm saying is that for a game to truly be unique and engaging, it has to draw on more advanced elements rather than just shooting, swordfighting, killing, etc. This doesn't just go for story, it also goes for gameplay and even music, to an extent. Try to see if there is something similar you can do to a board game, something that isn't overused like violence to achieve everything, or a type of story outline you can base your story on from a good novel (or real event, for that matter).

If my point isn't clear, what I'm saying is that for a game to truly be unique and engaging, it has to draw on more advanced elements rather than just shooting, swordfighting, killing, etc. This doesn't just go for story, it also goes for gameplay and even music, to an extent.

Great, solid, sound advice. Spoken like a true renaissant

Saying it alone takes away from it and I did over simplify the sentence as it is, but I said something in my first thread which pertains to this.

In my opinion, the only things that set the greats apart is the creative attention to detail as well as diverse exposure/inspiration.

I always say I won't ever aim nor will I ever claim to be original, different or unique.

However, I will always "Strive to blur the defining lines around my creations." and "Push the boundries of its percieved genre in hopes of spilling over into others."

I doubt I'm the first to say something along the lines, but those are things that are hardwired in my being, a part of my creed in a sense. ?§•??§?

I always look up games of the same genre/idea to mine. I learn off it, what went wrong? what made it un-realistic? What can I do better make sure its a game you actually like though, that's my advice.

Think of it as part of the constructive process.

If you find a game similar to your concept, consider questions like-

How can I differentiate my game from this one? Art style, setting, background story, characters, a new mechanic, humor, violence, there are plenty if ways to offer a different experience.

And the best question I think you can ask is- what does their game get WRONG?

Sound advice and great choice of words Sir Got_Rhythm ^_^ Couldn't of said it better myself :-)