6 Things I Know About Developing Game Software

[RCM]

No me. I don't know a damn thing about it. This from a fella at EA:

Armes also outlined his philosophy for game design, which he called "6 Things I Know About Developing Game Software." In order, that six-pack of principles was:

1. Never underestimate the universal joy of blowing stuff up: This point was self-explanatory, since it was illustrated by a fantastically fiery trailer for Burnout 3.
2. Nobody likes getting their ass kicked: Be it online or by the game's artificial intelligence, players will prefer to be given challenges versus frustrating obstacles. Armes used his own experiences getting clobbered by 18-year-old kids playing online sports games as an anecdote. He urged those present "to ask ourselves: are games too hard?"
3. The first three minutes are critical: Hook your audience or lose them.
4. How many people are working on "cool stuff?": Armes warned against spending too much time on bells and whistles like minigames and enough time on gameplay, presentation, and depth.
5. Never say never: Armes' example here was EA's rethinking of its practice of eschewing M-rated games, which will change with the release of Def Jam: Fight for NY. "We're not Disney," he said.
6. Stop worrying about the business and get back to making great games: 'Nuff said.

I agree with part 3 a whole lot. If a game im not particularly interested sucks at the get go i will not play through it. Here's the whole article. Enjoy.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/09...s_6106296.html

THE ONE, THE ONLY- RCM

[kainemaxwell]

I'll definitly agree with #3 and I think most of us here have stated about point #4 in various other threads too.

[SoulBlazer]

All of that makes great sence.

[pixelsnpolygons]

Good points.

[GaijinPunch]

Very good ponits. So how come EA only produces crap?

[SoulBlazer]

Actually, I buy a lot of EA stuff. :P

Wanna talk crap companies? How about Acclaim?

[GaijinPunch]

Wanna talk crap companies? How about Acclaim?

Touche'

[petewhitley]

Very good ponits. So how come EA only produces crap?

I don't think you really believe that 'Punch. We can bemoan EA's monopolistic ideals while at the same time respecting the general quality (if not originality) of their product.

[Neil Koch]

Even if you don't like sports games, EA has been producing some really good action games like Everything or Nothing and Lord of the Rings. These could have been games where they could have made a shitty game and slapped on the license and they probably would have still sold well, but they really made some quality games.

[delafro]

About #2: There's a fine line between challenge and frustration, and a lot of games don't know how to walk it. Good thing it looks like some people are picking that up.

[Aussie2B]

If #2 is true, how did Battletoads sell so well?

[fahrvergnugen]

He forgot the #1 rule of EA, "Fire all your fulltime QA & support staff and replace them with contractors who are allowed to work for you for a maximum of 6 months, lest the law force you to give them benefits." Or the #2 rule, "Buy an innovative and fantastic design house like Origin or Westwood, and boil it down to one crappy franchise before dissolving it."

EA's a bunch of scumbags. I hope they go the way of Acclaim.

[Querjek]

I agree that many of those are important, but I think that number 3 is wrong. If I want to play a game, I KNOW that I want to play it. Usually when I first start a game, I get continuously lost and disoriented. If I only played the first 3 minutes and formed an opinion on the whole game, then I probably would never have played games like Metal Gear Solid and Kingdom Hearts.

[thegreatescape]

Those 6-points are spot on, though its also interesting to note this:

Armes started things off with a bang, making a bold prediction that Europe--not America--would be the leader of next-generation console development

Codemasters, Croteam, Criterion... hey they all start with C, AND are european AND make great games.
And somehow i found my way to this article that says the PSP's battery life and final price will be announced at the tokyo game show, later this month.

[delafro]

If #2 is true, how did Battletoads sell so well?

One word: Marketing.

[Aussie2B]

Yeah, it had very strong marketing, but besides that, it was well-LIKED too. I can't really think of a single person I've come across that didn't like the game. Just about every single person will say that it's insanely frustrating, but it's so fun that people still love it and keep playing.

[Dr. Morbis]

Yeah, it had very strong marketing, but besides that, it was well-LIKED too. I can't really think of a single person I've come across that didn't like the game. Just about every single person will say that it's insanely frustrating, but it's so fun that people still love it and keep playing.

Agreed. Battletoads has that intangible Ghosts 'n Goblins factor: "We're gonna beat yo' ass repeatedly, and you're going to like it!"

[Dahne]

Armes started things off with a bang, making a bold prediction that Europe--not America--would be the leader of next-generation console development.

I think he's forgetting about something...let me see...maybe..JAPAN?! Japan is the center of the gaming world. The US and Europe are just the outskirts.

ask ourselves: are games too hard?

It's a good philosophy, but we all know how much challenge the average modern game has. The most important thing to keep a game from being frustrating is to keep the amount of cheap shots as low as possible.

The first three minutes are critical: Hook your audience or lose them.

I always liked the style of beginning in Final Fantasy VI and VII (maybe others, too. I'm not sure.). Short intro to set the stage, then throw the player directly in, with a minimum of direction. Then, once they're acquainted enough with the system to understand what they need mroe information about, then there's more story and a place to go for an in-depth tutorial.

"If the movie that you're making a game for is horrible, nobody really cares about the game," he said

Poor EA. They must get stuck with some really awful licenses.

[delafro]

I would say that Battletoads and Ghosts 'n Goblins would be more of the exception to the rule, because they were generally well designed and fun to play, even if you were getting your ass kicked all the while. The R-Type series would fall into this catergory as well. One of those games where, generally, if you die, you know that it's your fault and not the game's.

I was thinking more along the lines of frustration due to poor design or lazy programming, or cheap attempts to lengthen the gameplay of a title by making it unnessarily difficult. Think of a shooter with poor hit detection, or ridiculously hard bosses, for example.