next »

[7Soul]

I just played some Mari0 and realized "man, I love portal-based puzzles, I wish there was more".
Then I thought of this, would a game based on portal concepts be considered a rip-off? Or could it be the beginning of a new game genre?

A similar occurrence of this is the MOBA (massive online battle arena) genre. It started with DOTA, then HON and LOL came and people said they were copies, but now we have the MOBA genre that is slowly growing.

But what about the FPS genre? It became so saturated that now we have stuff like this

What's your view on this? Can we avoid overused video-game stereotypes? And how could existing genres be improved?


I've recently replayed Half-life and it really feels like a polished game, even now. I then read about it's development, and I learnt that it's success was heavily based on it's differences from other FPS at the time, such as cutscenes being replaced by scripted events and the addition of puzzles.
So, HL stood out between other FPSes because it twisted a few conventions, and added some elements to the gameplay, creating a unique experience.

[JigxorAndy]

A similar occurrence of this is the MOBA (massive online battle arena) genre. It started with DOTA, then HON and LOL came and people said they were copies, but now we have the MOBA genre that is slowly growing.

This is really how genres are created!

When something new and different arrives it stands out as being unique. Then when other games start to use similar elements they are often labelled as clones, until you have a whole series of games sharing those same elements, and a new genre is formed. For example, when FPSs came out similar to Doom, they were labelled as "Doom Clones". Now the Wikipedia article for Doom Clone redirects to First Person Shooter.

[BlueSweatshirt]

Designing a game based on genre is nothing more than shamelessly copying mechanics & nuances from a game(s) of the aforementioned genre.

That's why.

[Schoq]

Wanting to play with, expand on, improve on a concept is something to be ashamed of?

After the first platformer was made, there was no point in any more platformers being made?

Art is an originality contest?


What are you trying to say?

[BlueSweatshirt]

I was elucidating upon the whole "cloning" thing.

I never said any of the things you're referring to.

[DavidCaruso]

There's nothing inherently wrong with "cloning." The only problem is when the clones are worse than the originals, and even then that's not really a "problem" if the developers can learn from their mistakes and make even better games later on (which can be done with or without throwing in random gimmicks -- in fact, more "conventional" games can often be better than games which rely on novelty to engage the player.)

Also, with your example it doesn't really make it a new genre. No matter how many portals you add a 2D side-view platformer is going to play completely differently than a 3D first-person one, hence why they probably shouldn't be grouped together.

Also also, the FPS genre is far from "saturated," play better FPSes. Like Serious Sam 3: BFE! =P

[sublinimal]

Creativity is collaborative even when you think you're working alone.

[C.A. Sinner]

I then read about it's development, and I learnt that it's success was heavily based on it's differences from other FPS at the time, such as cutscenes being replaced by scripted events and the addition of puzzles.

just a tangent, but it goes much deeper than that. half life more or less started the whole "linear and cinematic" thing for single player FPSs. pretty much every major fps that came out after half life directly copies its format.

[Xion]

I think there's a difference between genres and mechanics. Portals are mechanics that can fit into many different genres (platformer, action, fps, shmup?) but I can't see there ever becoming a 'portal' genre, because it's just one mechanic. There might, however, arise a new genre that revolves around and requires the use of portals, but it would have to have more defining mechanics than 'portals used in x genre'

Though, on the other hand, I suppose there are different subgenres of genres, like puzzle-platformer and puzzle-fps, so why not portal-puzzle-platformer or portal-dodge-em-up-fps? Because that's getting ridiculous, that's why. You might as well just name the game at that point.

More on-topic, I think that there are genres is great. It lets people carry basic knowledge and assumptions from game to game without having to re-learn them everything. There's nothing wrong with working from an established foundation. That there can be genreless games is excellent as well, because sometimes not knowing anything about anything when you start can be just as fun as being able to dive right in.

I think problems arise when games within a certain genre become so numerous that many are virtually indistinguishable from one another, and have no merit of their own, or become so commercially lucrative that carbon copies are more highly valued than honest adventures in mechanics.

But I don't think this happens as often as people think it happens. Even terrible games can have some distinguishing features or concepts that are just executed poorly. And sometimes the only distinguishing characteristic of a good game is being well-done within the well-established structures of the genre.

Also I love well-done ripoffs (that acknowledge their source and aren't solely for monetization).

[ham and brie]

Though, on the other hand, I suppose there are different subgenres of genres, like puzzle-platformer and puzzle-fps, so why not portal-puzzle-platformer or portal-dodge-em-up-fps? Because that's getting ridiculous, that's why. You might as well just name the game at that point.

The Japanese use "genre" to do pretty much exactly that. Like Gravity Rush/Daze's genre is gravity action-adventure. They treat it as a very brief description of the game, rather than as a categorisation, and even as a way of indicating what the USP is.

[baconman]

Personally, I see genres and mechanics as a sort of master puzzle that people have yet to fully assemble, to achieve a more perfect, fun gaming world. And new pieces are being found or invented every day.

Also, established foundations are easier to build from, too; which allows for considerably more rapid production. Experimentation is usually sprinkled on top of basics, not within them.

[Udderdude]

Personally, I see genres and mechanics as a sort of master puzzle that people have yet to fully assemble, to achieve a more perfect, fun gaming world. And new pieces are being found or invented every day.

Also, established foundations are easier to build from, too; which allows for considerably more rapid production. Experimentation is usually sprinkled on top of basics, not within them.

This is true, however randomly combining various puzzle pieces won't necessarily create something that works well.  It requires careful thought and precision, otherwise you'll end up with a gigantic mess most of the time.  It's like taking a bunch of random ingredients, throwing it into an oven and expecting a gourmet meal.

In my not so humble opinion, Mari0 is one of those messes.  An experiment, yeah, but not something I'd actually want to play.

[C.A. Sinner]

More on-topic, I think that there are genres is great. It lets people carry basic knowledge and assumptions from game to game without having to re-learn them everything.

which is why im in favor of relatively narrow genre definitions, so we can identify what the "core" of the genre is and then build or diverge from there. a lot of people seem to see genres as conventions to slavishly adhere to though which is unfortunate.

[Magnesium Ninja]

The genre basically refers to the style of gameplay that is prominent within the game, so "Portal-____" wouldn't really make much sense, because that's not a gameplay style, it's (as someone else has said) a gameplay mechanic.

Making a game that takes elements from LoL or DotA feels more acceptable than taking portal mechanics from Portal. You're taking a concept instead of a specific mechanic or tool.

[Marc Wilhelm]

More on-topic, I think that there are genres is great. It lets people carry basic knowledge and assumptions from game to game without having to re-learn them everything.

which is why im in favor of relatively narrow genre definitions, so we can identify what the "core" of the genre is and then build or diverge from there. a lot of people seem to see genres as conventions to slavishly adhere to though which is unfortunate.

Yes, whether a game is refining a genre, evolving related mechanics or starting from scratch like a babe in the woods, the ideal path to take is the one emergence is allowed to foster based on what is best for the game being created.