I grew up learning the game industry in a different light than it is now. What worked ten yars ago doesn't work now. The core gamers have changed over the decade. Why is this important?
I just got into game development. Released a couple of professional games already, on console and one on PC. And I came to learn that the game has changed. So lost out at sea of depression and passion, I have come to you /vr/. I need to look at the past in order to help me with my future. I need to understand what it means to be a game developer. I need to know what made many of these developers of the old tick. I thought I knew it all, but I learned I know nothing. And maybe, just maybe, you can't survive as a lone developer anymore.
>modern games
Found your problem
>>3002098
Yeah, so when the JapaJews started making shitty 3D games, they forgot to add the gameplay. As a result, we have been playing the same Polygon shitfests for the last twenty years.
Here is a good place to start if you want to see where the hardcore 2D video games last evolved.
I offer: Don Pachi IV by Cave.
>>3002115
Wouldn't Devil May Cry or Ninja Gaiden Black be the hardcore of 3D action games?
>>3002098
>Released a couple of professional games already, on console and one on PC
Sorry about how everybody hates the thing you poured your heart and soul into
Genuinely
>>3002120
Bah i only poured as much as necessary. I'm not a kid anymore. Games are ran on two things: creativity and business sense. Heart and soul is cheap and are fabrications of a senseless motivation.
What's this thread about
I can tell you what a game is if that's what you need
>>3002132
All input is welcome, dude.
>>3002132
>I can tell you what a game is
a miserable pile of secrets
also they steal men's souls, and make them their slaves
Possible shill marketer detected
That said, i'm an oldish fellow round here (~30)
G A M E P L AY
must be challenging, engaging, and suprising in some way.
Creativity, art design, and general genre all come after these factors for me. I've played hundreds of games and all of my favorites excel in at least one of these areas. Survival Horror or RPG are engaging. Games that punish you for mistakes like Dark Souls are my favorite, though i wouldn't call the atmosphere terribly unique compared to all games of that ilk. I only ever enjoy games with myriad secrets or ways to complete them.
I know it's not much, but FFT, Super Metroid, and SOTN are my top three. I currently dig GTAV and DS2 as my go-tos. In retro i dig the SaGa series as well as old adevnture games like Deja Vu and Akalabeth.
hope it helps
>>3002134
Well a game has two layers: the first is the mechanical layer and the second is the aesthetic layer.
If you strip away everything but the logic of your game, it's basically a bunch of tables and graphs relating to changes the player can make to their experience over time. This is the mechanical layer. The first reason people play games is to amuse themselves by essentially wasting their time adapting to a new set of rules and discovering, in a manner that could be considered child-like, the extent of their power within this ruleset.
The aesthetic layer is everything else to do with your game - static, objective things like graphics and sound resources, but also less concrete things like story and setting. This is the second reason that people play games: to immerse themselves in a world they enjoy, to experience stories, characters, visuals and music.
There are different types of gamers that appreciate games on different levels, but I would argue that the aesthetic layer is the most important, for commercial reasons and by virtue of the fact that players can say they had a good time completing a game even if the mechanics were mildly frustrating at points or otherwise imperfect. Also, only puzzle games like Tetris and Bejeweled can succeed on mechanics and abstract aesthetics alone, and if you think you're going to create the next Tetris then you're probably a genius and you wasted your time reading this whole post
>>3002130
Fuck you, you fucking piece of shit.
>>3002124
>Games are ran on two things: creativity and business sense.
I'm nobody even remotely related to development but from my perspective it always seemed like games ran on Effort, Effort, and more Effort. There are plenty of great idea men out there and money of course makes it all happen but it seemed like what separated the gold from the turds in the quality of games was how thorough they were worked on. Again, layman's perspective here.
>>3002148
Yeah, the mechanical layer, that's what's missing from 3D games, and the aesthetic layer is all Polygons, once again, total cheap garbage. See you in IsraHell.
>>3002162
what would even be a good mechanical layer for 3D games?
The only thing I don't like about modern games nowadays is they generally all have the same dual analog stick control scheme in some semi open world environment with the samey general mechanics. I like going back and playing games like Resident Evil or MGS1 because the controls are really unfamiliar compared to other games and it was just a matter of getting used to the quirks of each game you played.
Keep in mind the apex of the SNES era suffered from samey controls, but the early 3D era has that wonderful chaotic nuisance of people just implementing whatever they thought would work at the time.
Idk just try to make new experiences and don't focus too much on the future or past.
>>3002098
You have to go back, way back, all the way back. It's only when you can snatch the wumpus from the zork's palm that you will be ready, grasshopper.
I'm 20 yrs old, so maybe my opinion can help?
In my opinion good controls, captivating story and a difficulty that isn't bullshit or doesn't revolve around farming or grinding are the three key elements in any game.
The story doesn't even need to be something epic or a masterpiece. It just needs to make sense. And if it doesn't, I think it should be aware of this.
>>3002098
Anyone who thinks good, new games aren't being made anymore either isn't paying attention or doesn't like games very much.
But I'll bite. What are your favorite games of old? What do you enjoy doing in a game? What kind of game do you want to make? That's where you should be starting.
>>3002467
>Anyone who thinks good, new games aren't being made anymore either isn't paying attention or doesn't like games very much.
If you stick to the fringes of gaming yes.
>>3002115
If you want to go back to before there were 3D games, you have a long way to go. Game design can be good or bad in either 2D or 3D. Implying otherwise is idiotic.
>>3002471
Gaming is so massive now that even the fringes are bigger than a lot of the mainstream used to be. What used to be very niche genres like roguelikes are far bigger than they ever were.
The volume and diversity of games being made now is mind boggling.
>>3002486
Hey man you justify how you want but that's a lie. You basically have to be a hipster to enjoy games now. I'm not blind to the fact that the modern games I play are unpopular obscure to borderline obscure games that probably aren't top 30.
>>3002491
I am in no way a hipster. I'm rapidly approaching old man, and I still have way more games coming out that I want to play than I have time for.
Similar to you, most of the games I play wouldn't come close to the top 30 either, but I don't see that as a problem. That's exactly what I think is so great. I've always had pretty specific and unusual tastes though so I'm used to most big games not appealing. This is way better to me than when every other game was some sort of platformer.
>>3002507
Unpopular obscure games are hipster man.
>>3002164
Just rip off fun mechanics from another game (not even necessarily vidya), massage them slightly, add a story ripped off from the newest hit young adult novel, shove the whole thing into Build and you're done.
>>3002510
Honestly, I don't even know what people mean when they use the word hipster anymore. If it's anything that's not in the top 30, then I guess I'm just a stupid hipster doofus.
But also then the term barely means anything at all to me at that point. I would have thought Undertale is a good example of a "hipster" game, but it's mega popular right now.
I dunno....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w8z0CN3Y-E
>>3002098
Link to your games?
>>3002527
Wasn't that how some people made a few 2D games as well?
>>3002532
hipster is linking obscure things.. it got a bad reputation because hipster started bragging about this
Undertale is obscure enough for "normies", but in the video game culture, not so much, so this kind of things varies...
>>3002098
Not your personal army.
>>3002098
Why did they get rid of the trippy colors in Astral Observatory? That was my only gripe with the graphical changes on 3DS.
Sorry for derailing. Continue.
>>3002603
Stop putting tags on people's tastes. Grow up.
As a neutral party I've spent the last year or two pretty much exclusively playing old games. I don't do it because I think new games are bad, I do it because I want to see for myself whether things people gush about being good are actually good. With that in mind I've found that 1 in 10 games I play I actually enjoy, 9 out of those 10 I either find to be too clunky to play or I just can't find the point in playing any further, because I'm reminded of newer games that took the same formula and got it right.
You might say I'm too impatiant, and you may be right, but at the same time I think there's some HEAVY bias going around with a lot of /vr/ game players. One exanple of a bias I see all the damn time is that back in the day most people's standards were lower because of the lack of options available, so when they play an okay game that's got plenty of content they think it's amazing, because that's the only game they'll be playing for a while, and when they play a great game that's extremely short it sours their opinion. I've got to the point where I flat out can't trust the opinion of somebody who played an old game when it came out and never revisited it with a neutral mindset.
That being said there are some aspects of older games that just aren't done that often that I wish I could see more of. My favorite thing that seemed to stop being a thing for the most part is when a game gives you some form of feedback for some bizarrely specific thing. The whole "the devs thought of everything". I think this mostly went away because modern devs usually don't playtest their games. Even indie companies hire dedicated people for playtesting. When you playtest your own game instead of figuring out fun things to add by playing the game you leave your game design goals on some kind of checklist while somebody else plays the game that you usually won't listen to for input other than "x is broken" or "y isn't fun".
>>3002507
Honestly, this sounds more like you're settling for anything rather than for what would be considered good out of desperation.
>>3002098
>as a lone developer anymore.
huh, and by any chance could you do it in late 90s? no, right?
it can perhaps be said that development is now a mulmultimillinaire investment, while in 2000 small studios funded by private investors or founded by a small group of estabilished developers with a life time of savings could compete in the same target audiences, genre, product polishness (and price range).
>>3002776
The difference is that as you said, now since there's lower bars of entry, there's also higher barriers of entry into any professional space. It's not the wild west anymore of vidya.
>>3002774
How could you possibly get that? It's the opposite. I love games, but my tastes tend to be a little odd is all. Most of my favorite games over the years weren't the big popular ones. If anything I think games and gaming these days are better than ever before.
>>3002787
I beg to differ, personally. I love games, too, which is precisely why I hate most of them right now. Even the indie stuff doesn't do it for me. Not because I want to hate them, but because I've not played an indie game that shows any shred of good game design. And for some reason, the way indies do retro graphics isn't exactly what I call good looking. Basically, a lot of indie games feel amateur, which is obvious, but lack direction or the right mindset, too. The point is, it's very very hard to have a good game make me like it anymore. And that's because all the middle tier B lister devs are either dead or out in mobile space or absorbed into one of the big companies. That's what I think we're missing: those games with some budget and teams behind it, but not too expensive or big to keep them from doing new things and making a profit.
>>3002537
Please deliver OP, otherwise I'll just have to assume that your games are shit.
>>3002098
what's the matter OP, you preceduraly generated open world game with transexual protagonist, customizable spaceships, 10k unique wearables and purchasable hats didnt sell shit?
next time try not treating a game like it's an election, you just need to excite an audience instead of trying to amass votes from all walks of game
>>3002816
>that subtle bash on starbound
>>3002798
All I can say is we completely disagree on most of that. Even with my tastes as picky as they are, there's more coming out I'm into now than any time over the last 4 decades. If you don't like most of them, that's too bad but I don't really have much else to say about it.
Except I'll agree that many indie games don't look great aesthetically. I agree with that, but for me it's the same as it's always been. If the game is good enough then I don't mind if it doesn't look great. If I did I'd never have played Rogue, and that would be very sad.
Also right now I'm totally loving Phantasy Star, but it's really not a very good looking or professional looking game a lot of the time. Doesn't bother me one bit though.
>>3002832
The difference is that I know Phantasy Star was made by people who played games. Whereas, the games of today...well, there's something to be said of people having the experience of gaming behind them and of course aesthetics. I understand that some people don't have artistic talent, but when you see doujin games with heart behind the music, art, and programming, then that says something about the skills of dedicated game developers compared to people that picked p game maker and made a game over the weekend.
>>3002845
>but when you see doujin games..
>>3002864
What doujin genre are we referring to, cause if it's cave knockoffs, that's a given.
>>3002098
Check out the rareware conker developer commentaries on youtube
>>3002845
>The difference is that I know Phantasy Star was made by people who played games.
Almost all people who actually get into indie game development do it because they're obsessed with video games. The people who know nothing about games and are just copying Flappy Bird code in the hopes of making a quick buck are few and far between. Which isn't to say I think they're all good, or even a notable percentage are good. But in the end, I don't care about the bad ones I just care about the good ones.
There are a million bad indie puzzle games out there, and I'm happy they exist if it means one of them turned out to be great. Here's a game most people hate and called trash, but I loved every moment of it. It doesn't bother me at all that most people didn't like it, I just care that I liked it. My game library is full of stuff like that.
On another note, right now I'm going through a lot of the 7 day roguelikes from this year's challenge. As usual most of them aren't great, but even in the not great ones there's often an interesting idea here or there and I love discovering that.
Ditto with the XBLA Indie Games section. Loads of crap, but weird bits of gold or unrealized ideas that I find fascinating to dig through. And then every once in a while there's a gem.
>>3002138
>FFT, SOTN
Completely broken
>Super Metroid
Terrible pacing
Dark Souls is better than all three of these.
>>3002148
>the aesthetic layer is the most important
The greatest board game (Go) has the worst graphics. I play with plastic stones and a cardboard board. It's just as fun as with slate/shell/wood.
>only puzzle games like Tetris and Bejeweled can succeed on mechanics and abstract aesthetics alone
Some of the best action video games of all time (Defender, Robotron) have extremely primitive graphics.
>>3002895
It's one thing to say that you'll find gold in a pile of coal. It's another when that percentage is less than 10%. Or even 5%. Fez may seem charming to some people, but to a person like me who been through many platformers in history, Fez just seems like a novelty for the first five minutes, then makes me go back and play games with more all around presentation and mechanics, like Mario bros or Donkey Kong. Fez is good as an entry level video game, but in no way would I call it necessarily a game meant for experienced gamers.
Of course I'm being subjective about this, but I suppose it's better to say that a lot of games, indie and AAA, don't hit that sweet spot most of the time. There were also more good games before 2005 than there were bad ones. A lot of shit, still, but an higher ratio of good stuff to the bad stuff compared to now.
The only game that gave me some satisfaction over the last few years was Demon Souls. It plays like a more grown up Zelda game without the simplicity or lack of narrative of the Monster Hunter games. It was refreshing.
>>3002912
>Or even 5%
That's kind of my point, I've never liked more than 5% of the games that come out. Indie games are an even lower percentage than that, but it doesn't bother me because I like the process of checking out games.
>Fez may seem charming to some people, but to a person like me who been through many platformers in history, Fez just seems like a novelty for the first five minutes
Part of the problem with Fez is that because it's reaction was so bad a lot of people don't even know what kind of game it is. It looks similar to a platformer on the surface, but really isn't one at all. You traverse the world by hopping from platform to platform, but that's not really the game. You could replace pretty much every jump with a ramp or bridge and it really wouldn't change the much at all.
It's actually mostly a puzzle exploration game. Despite it's appearance it has a lot more to do with games like Myst than any real platformer like Mario. And a good example of my pickiness, because I don't like straight platformers. I like more action ones like Castlevania, but I've never played all the way through a Mario or Sonic game.
Personally I didn't like Demon's Souls either, mostly because of the setting. Monster Hunter is one of my favorite series of all time though, in big part because they throw just about all narrative out the window and the game is just all about big boss fights.
>>3002912
>The only game that gave me some satisfaction over the last few years was Demon Souls. It plays like a more grown up Zelda game
And you're calling indie games cancer?
>>3002895
I've played maybe 3 indie games I actually liked. Only finished one. They are really horrible. They're flash games behind a paywall. I think they're for a generation of kids that didn't grow up with that.
>>3002098
Buddy, if I were you I would forget game development.
It's too competitive: a never-ending flow of kids, and the competition. Every one of them trying to make their mark.
Save yourself the pain and trouble.
You're less free to use videogames as a muse, now it's all a pressure environment. If you're Miyamoto, it works fine. If things aren't working out and people don't like what you make or you don't like the common taste, things go badly.
People's tastes and aesthetics are vastly more pathetic that they'd like to believe. They're easily manipulated. You'll have to work that people will even bother trying your games or giving them a chance.
Get a job in science or something. I'm studying ecology in university as a mature student.
A final thing - go on welfare if you have to. If I can't get a good job I really like I'll live off welfare. Food grows by itself and I'm entitled to my fair share of it, so are you, and so is everyone. Why should you listen to a piece of paper that says it's someone else's? It's yours and you own it. Humans working for the sake of it and always trying to build things that are why the world is in the mess it is today.
>>3002954
That's a common attitude around here. I feel very differently, but you're free to your opinion.
>>3002979
Games are shit to be blunt. Especially on PC. I played Undertale and that was the best PC game I've played in the past probably 8 or 10 years. That's sad but true. And that was the one indie games I've actually finished.
Every time I buy a new PC games it's a console port with near zero PC optimization or some terribly outsourced pile. Like fucking Vermantide... Or the latest one I played Rainbow Six Siege. Some of have decent gameplay but it doesn't matter after they get raped by DLC/ cutoff content and just poor PC optimization.
I've come to the realization after blindly thinking that there was no way it was "just me" for years. The modern gamer is a fucking a retard that doesn't care about games. They just want to waste time in some bullshit. I see this in modern competitive games like when I play DOTA. Ya lets play a ranked game so your dumb ass can get that fucking daily achievement. Because that's what rank is for. It’s sad but it’s the current state of the industry. Casuals are the new hardcore.
>>3003002
I didn't like Undertale at all. I've played many a rpg games made by people throughout the years. Some much better innovated than Undertale. The one thing that separates the two is that the people who made those small rpg games didn't know how to sell themselves unfortunately and gave away their games for free while the undertale guy sold his. His game isn't original compared to others, but it did make a point that people are willing to play anything with the right message to it and as long as you throw it in front of their faces. That's another thing, getting noticed.
>>3003010
I liked Undertale because it was different and the story was actually good. Everything about it sounds horrible but somehow it works.
>>3003002
Like I say, I know that's a common attitude around here I just have a very different opinion. I play a lot of games, and games from all eras. There are plenty still coming out that I have a blast with. If you feel differently that's sad, but I don't really have a lot else to say about it. Just is what it is.
>>3002138
>DS2 as my go-tos.
by late 90s im assuming FFT final fantasy tactics
you mentioned dark souls, else DS2 could mean anything, FFS Fgt and their EUOA
>>3003010
What's wrong with wanting to make money off your games? Do you have a problem that Nintendo charges money for their games?
>>3003026
I still play games they're just disappointments more than enjoyments now. Gave two brand new example in that post.
On Nintendo's side though their games have been pretty amazing.
>>3003035
No one said they have a problem with money making.
>>3003038
>I still play games they're just disappointments more than enjoyments now.
Which is why I said it was sad, but beyond that it just is what it is. Personally I think we're in a gaming golden age in many ways, but to each their own. But there's not really much point in going back and forth over it.
>>3003046
>gaming golden age
Please define that because I hear that and then I get memories of the Atari age being the golden age with the overbundance of cheap games and everyone making their own console.
>>3003046
>golden age
Na fuck that. I'd love if the world went back in time before russians and beaners invaded every fucking online game there was. Hell even go back to the 90s pre mainstream internet.
You pretty much need to black out all online things with video games to avoid the cancer.
>>3003059
I just mean it as a great time for gaming is all.
>>3003093
We thought the same thing in the 80s too.
>>3003097
Indeed that's true.
>>3002821
ROFL, see what i mean, i never heard of starbound btw.
looking into it, beta 2012, steam early access 2013 kekeke
but it actually looks cool, ill add it to my watchlist and check back each 5 years to buy when it releases
>>3003156
The only thing that's really like Starbound in there was the procedural generation. I don't think that guy had actually played it.
Interesting game, but the control scheme sucks balls.
OP post your sidescrolling procedurally-generated Metroidvania so we can laugh at you.
>>3003104
I love it when people try to call out samefags and get it wrong. No, I'm not OP.
I asked to see OP's games because most of the indies who complain how they "can't make it" are either a) writing shitty little arcade games that you should be able to download for free on your phone or b) have a very unpolished or unprofessional presentation. Either way, it's no mystery wy their games aren't selling.
I just wanted to see if either of those were true of OP. Fix the obvious stuff before you start getting all philosophical about "what it means to be a developer."
First and foremost, even before gameplay, comes the control. If people can't play your game because of the controls, the rest of it doesn't matter.
Next comes gameplay. This must be simple and intuitive to pick up and play, but ultimately hard to master. If you've picked a genre to make a game in, play many other games from that genre, both good and bad. Find what works and what doesn't.
Try to think of new ideas also. There are a sea of games released digitally on PC and console. You have to make yours stand out from the crowd.
Try putting in difficulty settings. This will open up your potential market. Trying to sell a game that's really hard with no easy mode in today's world is not a good idea.
Technical issues such as issues with framerate should be weeded out to the greatest possible extent. As far as the end user is concerned, ther are none.
The music is important, especially if you are making a retro-styled game. People will come back to a game with good music.
You can put in cutscenes, but keep them short and sweet. They can also be expensive in both time and money, so it makes more sense as a lone developer to spend more time on gameplay.
Find a happy medium for the price. This depends on the scale of the game. Price it appropriately.
Finally, market your game. I'm not sure what kind of options you have there. Does Steam or PSN/XBL offer any sort of marketing platform?
Good luck!
>>3002879
link faggot?
>>3003248
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgtAXCaSlpk
>>3003310
best commentary ever
>>3002098
>professional games
>lone developer
choose one
>>3006517
um
the second one
>>3002895
wich game is this?
>>3006817
Fez
>>3003310
its short 13min, but muffled voice from shitty mic shared by two interlocutors speaking rapidly, hard for a non-native to hear, can i get a nutshell? thanks
>>3006919
I can barely here that quite and muffled recording either. Has nothing to do with your being a non native speaker.
>>3006924
quiet*
>>3002098
Videogames are two things: They are Games; which means in some way they are arbitrary contrivances that we make on purpose for distraction or recreation, and they are simulations; they are programmed simulacra of real circumstances.
Try figuring out which one of those you're failing to utilize to it's fullest.
>>3006927
Nowadays "games" aren't games. See Gone Home, Journey, and Goat simulator.
There's no way to lose because those games have no score or goal. They have an ending and start. They're more interactive movies or ebooks than games.
>>3006925
hear*
:P
>>3006927
well if you're going there
Videogames are two things: They are GAMES; which means in some way they are arbitrary contrivances that we make on purpose for distraction or recreation,
and they are VIDEO streams, moving pictures that change as a function of time and user input.
joke aside, games arent all simulation, and i don't mean futuristic spaceships, as these are simply simulation of the real world with circunstances still possible just never experienced by the game creators (and the same reasoning applied to fantasy), but logic, puzzle or mathematical games come to mind.
>>3007791
and that definition if applied to a DVD scene selection menu or the "videogames" usually mocked as interactive films would fit in a common category.
I find it strange that most of you don't seem to remember that "flappy bird" was a thing.
>>3007939
>someone got rich with Flappy Bird
>probably other people got rich too with a Flappy Bird knockoff
This generation, man. And people make fun of Shaq Fu. Thinking about that, if you program a Shaq Fu version with auto combos for touchscreen and even worst opponent AI and release for iOS you'd gain a genius status and kids will think they're playing a major classic.
>>3007960
well actually I was talking about how quickly developed, lazy "games" that "sell" for cheap were already around back then. Guys who don't care about quality, they just go "hey I maek gaemz now you pay me!".
>>3007808
We were just pretending we were retarded to avoid overplaying our hands and dripping any hot concepts onto the fiery grill of this gaming zeitgeist right here.
Name some examples of things you thought you knew but you didn't, OP.
I can spend all day saying what games mean to me and get nowhere.
>>3002138
>I currently dig DS2
His best work, IMO
>>3008089
nah, sorry I was just rambling. Saw "flappy bird" mentioned and "making games have changed" atmosphere, where in fact it's really the same just that now with the same effort you can dish out better looking games. A lot of people did throw out "shareware" stuff with very simplistic games hoping they get paid and those games were bundled in shareware collection CDs, much like the app store nowadays.
Bump to save thread while I track down a relevant link.
>How do your ideas come from these individual moments into the full art of game game design?
>Another important thing is to consider the basic desires of people, even if all you're thinking about is a simple game. For example, you have active desires -- "Freedom from Fear", as they say, the way people actively want to avoid fear in their lives. And one way they deal with that is by engaging in a sorting process.
>Let's say that you have a flat surface with some bumps sticking up out of it. Most people would want to see those bumps removed, as a sort of equalizing or "beautification" process. Also -- you know the game Othello, right? A lot of the fun in that game is the exhilaration you get when you flip a lot of pieces and make more of the board your color. Tidying up things, in a way.
>It's the same thing even in business -- it's nicer when you have a well-organized Excel spreadsheet then a cluttered one. It's a continual process of actively sorting and bringing things under control, and the reason why people do this is because it helps make life simpler for them -- the process itself is fun, too.
>As for how this goes back into video games, one thing you see a lot of in games is the act of "erasing," or "destruction." For example, in Pac-Man, you're eating dots -- wocka-wocka-wocka-wocka. That is erasing, and it's also a form of destruction. You're destroying everything in your path, and you're leveling out the entire playfield.
This man is a god.
>>3010517
>This man is a god.
so youre quote the man in the picture
i hope he is talking it was a mistake in late 90s for sonic, 3d as a whole is a natural evolution just as much as strereo 3d is the next, even if but 10y from now devs will say 2015's VR was a mistake, but at least it will work in 2030 in the 4th VR reborn fad.
this concept of normalizing patterns can be valid, but sounds more like conditioning, in its raw form is what makes those inane 80s monochrome, 90s flash, 2000s mobile games, souless pieces of shit "row fillers" and dumbed down "production simulators", that keep you going infinitely to normalize another small range of the whole pattern until it goes from time killers to annoyance and you pause the gaming session, but you just killed time, you didn't really rewind your brain thru entertainment, you didnt have fun!in other words tetris.
>>3002115
Your example of a good game is a shitty Cave game with horrendous prerendered graphics?
>>3010857
>3d as a whole is a natural evolution just as much as strereo 3d is the next
Is it, though? I dunno man. Vidya has already established itself as a medium that's rather unlike most others. The fact is there's certain things you can and cannot do in both 2D and 3D; each perspective affords unique, mutually-exclusive styles of gameplay. Who are we to say which one's better? Who's anyone to say that?
I guess it doesn't matter though. I suppose just because something is more "evolved" doesn't necessarily mean it is "better". Why the fuck did I bother writing this post?
You guys act as if 2D is dead.
Which is fucking hilarious, becuase most games actually are 2D if you think about it.
It's just X-Z instead of X-Y.
Resident Evil is 2D, because you have virtually no control over the Y axis.
But thats just me being a cheeky cunt.
Traditionally 2D exists and some good games have come out in 2D. It's just in this day and age it's actually easier to make a 3D game, or at least the 2.5D with 2D plane and 3D models.
Sprites are way harder to work with then models and generally perform worse.
>>3011136
I want them to stop jerking off with graphics and take all that extra space they gain by making a game in 2D instead of 3D, and fill all of it up with nonstop, neverending, 100% pure and simple good old fashioned fucking level design. I want my Sonic 3 and Yoshi's Island with no less than 300 all-new areas, and I expect each and every one of them to match and/or exceed the same standards of quality of the original titles.
>>3011136
>this game is 2D because it doesn't take advantage of the third axis xD
>if you can't jump, it's probably 2D!
>>3011096
i guess i worded it badly, 3d and after that vr are natural evolution in the output interface (with vr also including input sometmes), but i didnt mean that it substitutes the previous paradigm.
2d, 3d, vr, submerged centrifuge, matrix, and holodecks, will likely all co-exist
