next »

[SolarLune]

I think that I need to step back from the 'epic game' ideas, and either choose one of two paths.

THE EMOTIONS OF SMALL PROJECTS
- A small easy project is relaxing.
- A small balanced project will give you a feeling of control.
- A small difficult project is arousing.
^ all three are positive.

THE EMOTIONS OF BIG PROJECTS
- A big easy project will defeat you through boredom.
- A big balanced project will give you a feeling of flow, a state of optimal happiness and energized focus. This is what people want to feel, which is why they aim for big projects.
- A big difficult project will defeat you through anxiety.
^ only one of these three is positive.

Understanding your skills and your emotions is key to success. 

That makes a lot of sense, and I think that for people starting out really creating indie games, perhaps aiming for simpler, smaller games is the way to go.

You need to add that in most of times ppl will like more ur bigger project than smaller one.

That also is true, which is why developers aim for larger projects more often. However, smaller projects can expand to larger ones (like Voxatron is doing). It's a pretty small game so far, but with user-created content and adding features and items over time, it can become a big, and yet interesting game. This is the 'MineCraft'-styled progression that I mentioned - rather than aiming to make a gigantic game from scratch, the developer of Voxatron released the game in a much smaller (but not less finished) state, and is working on improving it over time.

[dustin]

I think many of those emotions are pretty good except...

- A small easy project is relaxing.

small games are in no way relaxing, they are frantic.  Trying to get things done in short amounts of time is never relaxing.

You need to add that in most of times ppl will like more ur bigger project than smaller one.

I've haven't really done anything big (1-4 weeks only), but within that time frame how much time I spent on something didn't really have any relation to how well it was received.

With that said if your selling a game (to end users) then you need to spend more time then that on it.  thing is for people who haven't finished a game and are asking for help they probably aren't (or shouldn't) be selling their first game anyway, so completing a couple week long projects seems the right thing to do.

[SolarLune]

I think many of those emotions are pretty good except...

- A small easy project is relaxing.

small games are in no way relaxing, they are frantic.  Trying to get things done in short amounts of time is never relaxing.

It depends. Small games can be relaxing if you know that you have 5 things to make to complete the game and you can do 1 a day. Even if you take the same pace, knowing that you have to make, say, 50 for a large game can be stressful. If you have only 5 things to make to complete a game, but try to finish 3 of them in a day, then it can also be stressful to make a small game.

[Jasmine]

^ you're both missing the word easy.

[SolarLune]

Oh. Right. You did say 'easy'. Heh, I completely overlooked that.

Small easy (or balanced) projects are good things. Also, small and easy (or balanced) projects can fairly comfortably become large projects, and that growth is a lot easier to deal with than starting out with a big project in mind.

[Paul Eres]

another thought re the original topic: some people just aren't cut out to finish big projects (such as games) on their own. you shouldn't beat yourself up over it you can't finish games. it's possible to live a happy and fulfilling life without ever finishing a game (or a novel, etc.), there are many paths to "self-actualization" and making games is just one of them

also, some people find that if they adopt the attitude that they don't have to finish games, that it's okay if they don't, then they'd feel less stress or pressure towards finishing them, and then suddenly they'd start finishing games now that the thought that they *had* to finish them was banished; it then didn't feel like an obligation anymore, but something you are doing because you want to do it, not because you have to do it

[Jasmine]

another thought re the original topic: some people just aren't cut out to finish big projects (such as games) on their own [...] there are many paths to "self-actualization" and making games is just one of them

I see self-actualisation as a state of being, rather than a goal that one has to complete. And that's really how Maslow intended it, before the theory got distorted into how it is commonly thought of today.

What we focus our mental energy upon is only a means to an end, insofar as when we complete that task, we proceed to focus our mental energy upon something else.

But when we achieve self-actualisation, there isn't a higher level to focus our mental energy upon, so we must remain focused on that level, such that it becomes a state of being.

Goal oriented people are generally unable to self-actualise because they will be unable to perceive self-actualisation as anything but a "final goal". In pursuit of that, they'll always feel that they're never quite getting there, somewhat reminiscent to the story of tantalus.

[Gimym TILBERT]

Also maslow is a total rip off from chakra and similar secular theory

[Jasmine]

Also maslow is a total rip off from chakra and similar secular theory

What matters is the most useful evolution of a theory, not the primordeal musings from which it grew.

[Gimym TILBERT]

they were far from musing, it's just that we don't value spiritual flavor, but spiritual was the science back then and god metaphore of higher intellectual concept. That we confuse the literary and elitist take with the popular belief of those same concept is what blind us. Once you understand that philosopher and thinker of that times had the same reverence and deference we have toward morden godless concept, which are simply intellectually the same things. Replace reality, dimension with god that represent those quality and concept then any old hinduist, islamist, egyptian, chineese, wolof scholar text and thought will make sense. It's not like modern scholar are not aware about this, they reference those text copiously. I admit sometimes they certainly need to remove "cultural" reference to made them palatable to modern audience again. Also they were hugely influential in gaming in a stealthy way by bringing most concept before the invention of the medium!

Listen to your elder young brat! They have nugget of wisdom.

[Jasmine]

But even so, it's good to strip away irrelevancy by distilling a theory down to it's important parts. It's like the unix mantra of "a program should do one thing well" -- so a theory should try to do one thing well ie, make it's statement concisely, without embellishing it with cultural praxis.

That's not to say that theories should be isolationist, just essentialist.

[Paul Eres]

probably should have clarified: i meant self-actualization in the vague new age sense rather than the specific maslow sense, even though he first used the term; i fear that caused confusion. more specifically i meant 'there are many ways to fulfill your potential and be happy besides finishing games'

[kasrak]

you make a list of features or things the game needs to have to be considered finished

you don't change that list (sometimes called feature-locking the design)

you release it when that list of features are all implemented

This is exactly what I had to do halfway through developing my first game. I realized that every time I finished a feature, I'd add two more to the todo list. Not exactly a great process for finishing...so I just forced myself to make a final todo list and just went through all those items.

[Ninja Dodo]

One thing I'm finding helps me is having two separate to do lists.

One is immediate, individual smaller tasks that I can complete right away in an hour or a day tops. I usually try to put this in my Startup folder as a txt file so I see it every time I open Windows. I'll often be adding to this as I'm testing new ideas and seeing what works and what else the game needs...

The second is part of a larger document with ideas and tasks I want to remember for later. If I'm planning ahead this is effectively the design doc, but if it's more of a make-it-up-as-I-go project it's basically just a list with a few notes and guidelines. I also keep a list of discarded ideas with a note for each saying why they had to go. Cleans up the main doc and leaves me with a record of stupid ideas I might change my mind about later.

If my immediate list is empty I look at doc #2 for new stuff to do.

This way I don't get discouraged looking at a giant list of I don't know where to start...

It's not the most organized approach, but it's working pretty well for smaller projects at least. I find if I overthink things ahead of time I just end up with a lot of nice notes and drawings, but no actual game.

[Paul Eres]

that's also my method. i have a smaller list of my next 10 or so tasks that i'm currently working on, and a larger list of hundreds of tasks that i'll one day work on. i also organize my tasks by topic, for instance, currently i have these categories of tasks for my game SD: creatures, worldmap, dream mode, options menu, polish, performance, bugs, small features, large features, resources, playtesting, balancing, promotion -- each of those has anywhere from 10 to 70 tasks listed under them