magerette
Hedgewitch
- Joined
- October 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,834
Bit-tech.net posts an article by indie dev Cliff Harris (Positech Games) which asks several worthwhile questions about the framework of modern games, such as " Why do games always cater for the lowest common denominator?" and "...why are so many games treating us all like idiots?" :
Here he gives a specific example:You can take a lot of great game ideas, and then dumb then down to the lowest common denominator and make them boring and dull, that's a given. There are some great game ideas though that you just can't dumb down before they fall apart. Right now that means the game doesn't even get out of the starting gate.
I've heard of games flopping because the marketing sucked, budget problems, piracy and poor design but I haven't heard about any big games failing because they were too highbrow. Yet nobody is even trying to make those games...
More information.There was a game called Hacker when I was a kid, that my dad was into. I always remember him telling me with great excitement that when you got to a certain part of the game, in France, the game spoke to you in French. No tooltips, no help, you needed to know French. Pre-Internet, this was a considerable stumbling block. My dad bought a French dictionary and kept on playing. He also therefore learned a bit of French. Awesome idea.
You would never ever in a million years get a game like that past a publisher any more, which is a pity because I think there is a group of people out there who would love it. Games challenge our reflexes, our puzzle-solving skills, our memories and our endurance but they rarely challenge our knowledge. Why not? We aren't all drooling idiots.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,834