next »

[beestings]

Okay so I just really want to hear what you guys think.. I've been developing a game idea for a while now involving a character (a young boy in this case) who can freely roam and explore the town that he lives in. The main mechanics of the game include things like health, but there aren't any monsters or fighting or anything, it has more to do with tripping and falling down etc. The player also experiences fatigue from staying up a long time/running around a lot and will need to either do things like sleep or eat to regain strength (player gets sluggish when tired and often falls more if you try to run).
The game is mainly exploration I guess, you can talk to the townspeople and learn their stories and help them with their issues, for example the Bartender asks you to help him with his love life and an old man tries to rekindle his relationship with his daughter... It would be a third person3d game, but the camera would be a lot closer to the character than it traditionally is, like this:

giving a much more immersive feel.

Anyways, I was wondering if actual story progression is needed? Not little quest storyline, but long term stuff. Does there need to be an ultimate goal or do you think it's fine without that? Let me know your ideas! A large goal of the game is to expose human nature and tragedy through the eyes of an innocent little kid.

[nox]

The player simply needs a reason to play. If you don't deliver that through a long storyline, that's totally fine, but it has to come from somewhere...so yes, you do need an ultimate goal, but it need not be explicitly stated. Different players can have different goals--especially in an open-ended RPG.

A large goal of the game is to expose human nature and tragedy through the eyes of an innocent little kid.

That's the goal of you, the designer, not the goal of the player. You should express your themes through the gameplay if they're important to you, because a player will not be driven on to "expose human nature and tragedy" on their own.

[Siilk]

A large goal of the game is to expose human nature and tragedy through the eyes of an innocent little kid.

With a goal like that and the general lack of combat or (supposedly) dangerous platforming etc, I wonder if having health and fatigue will make any sense from the gameplay standpoint. With what you've described so far, I suppose making the gameplay closer an adventure(Kentucky rout 0, To the moon) or a "walking simulator"(think Gone home or Stanly parable) would be a better choice?

You still might make it a game(as opposed to virtual installation, a pure interactive narration experience) and have some sort of confrontation(even direct combat encounters) and various failure states but treat injuries or other negative consequences as states(injured, exhausted, robbed), as opposed to stat alterations(low health, low stamina, 0 gold coins). Such approach will let you be more flexible with potential outcomes of the game situations and add the necessary challenges and risks to player's actions while not making the game too "gamy" which might hurt the immersion in your particular case.  Of course, I do not pretend to understand the whole concept just by reading a single post(making your game feel "gamy" at a first glance might be the goal for you to create an intentional ludo-narrative dissonance) but these are the things you might to consider.

[Leon Fook]

I don't know, but the idea you mention sound just like Harvest Moon + survival element. The big part of why these game is good is their character interaction part where each character will have their own unique personality.

I don't know if a game can come without a story, every game is trying to tell a story, whether it is a walking sim or platformer. Maybe you won't need an ultimate goal for your game, but to keep the player going and engaging with your game especially when there is no fighting enemy or threat toward the playable character, you have to tell a story, either through a single, linear story, or via a story which have several path which you have to choose which one to branch toward. Or maybe several story tells on different character you have, where one story will cross path with another, then all join together in the end like a grand finale.

Actually a game mean people can play and interact with and there's no game that's not a game. What make a Video Game though, is a different thing.

[Krux]

I've read a definition about game, that requires two competing teams against each other. But that definition is from before the age of computer games.

[oodavid]

I play a game with my dog where I say "guess what"; then she lies as flat as possible on the floor, tail wagging. I wiggle my fingers and say it again and again until she's ready for some fun, then I grab her nose saying "gotcha nose" while she tries to dodge my feints - it's one of my all-time favourite games, she likes it too.

A game is something you enjoy, in whatever form it takes!

[Siilk]

A game is something you enjoy, in whatever form it takes!

Well, I enjoy eating and sleeping a lot. But that doesn't make this activity a game, does it?

[oodavid]

I call pedantry!

[Siilk]

I call pedantry!

Heh, that was a bit pedantic, but as this is an indie gamedev forum, having an accurate definition of our subject matter is rather important, don't you think? I for one, think that for our intents and purposes a game (as opposed to other sorts of interactive entertainment, including the petting of canine companions) should be defined as an interactive activity with a clearly defined set of failure states.

 I am not implying that "non-games" are worse(or better) than games, I just think that if interactive entertainment is properly defined, it's consumer will be less prone to being disappointed simply because of having a false premise of what it is supposed to be in the first place(like expecting an interactive art piece to be challenging or not being able to appreciate a game because of it's difficulty).

[Snowstorm]

In order for a game to be classified as a game:

• Must have a set goal, can be directly stated or not
• There are challenges that the player must overcome to achieve this goal
• A win condition
• A lose condition
• Difficulty
• Most importantly, must be mostly interactive

[s0]

just make what you want to make, who cares if it falls outside of existing categories?

as to the actual question in the OP, it'd probably be good have some central narrative thread to tie the smaller stories together, even if it's not the main point.

[balldrix]

This question, for me, brings up the idea of a toy vs game.

A toy is fun to play with but there is no set goals, no achievements, nothing to drive the user apart from the fact its fun to play with. 

A game will have a set goal or goals, the game is directing the player in a set of directions based on a desired outcome.  In computer games this can be demonstrated with story lines, collectables and/or achievement badges.

[Liens]

This question, for me, brings up the idea of a toy vs game.

A game is a kind of toy isn't it?

The way I see it is kind of like: "A gun is not a toy, don't 'play' with guns."
But I do play games.

Haha I dunno maybe I'm just not seeing it the same way you are.

[balldrix]

A game is a kind of toy isn't it?

In the past I've played games like The Sims, Sim City, Dogz and Catz.  They are fun to play with but do not feel the same as games with objectives or collectables. 

[Dacke]

What struck me most about the OP was the explicitly male point of view. Play as a boy, help a male bartender (with woman issues), help an old man (with woman issues). Watch out for the male-centric story telling and you'll get a more living game.

With regards to the question: what makes a game a game? I'm with C.A. Who cares? It's a fuzzy label applied to a bunch of stuff in order to make it easier to talk about. Depending on the context it can mean different things. In this context, you can use it as "something interactive on a computer" and that's fine.

edit: if you think you can establish a universal definition, you need to study some philosophy of language

[Jad]

Game is a fuzzy term. At some point a piece of software ceases to be a game, but there's no clear way to know exactly when and as some people will find great enjoyment in something that might not even have been intended as a 'game', it's very hard to define exactly what makes a game.

I also think that you should just make the game you want to make. If it feels like a game to you, then it probably should be made. You're also free to iterate, so if you ever find yourself wishing your game was more game-like, you are free to make it so.

But if your dream is a town simulator where running about and doing goal-less interactions with NPCs, then I say you should make it. I don't mind that in the least. I'd still call it a game.

edit: there's also webpages and software like, say, wikipedia that aren't games in the least, but they still provide the foundation for games - there's a wikipedia game where you're supposed to race between two terms (say 'cat' and 'lamp') only by clicking links instead of typing in the search field. When such rules are imposed, suddenly something that isn't a game turns into, if not a game, the foundation for a game. Computer game software has a long tradition of having certain interactions and certain rules so they're easily definable in their self-likeness, but like I said before, I don't think that should constrain anyone who would like to create something unlike those games.

I think the word 'computer game' is more of a tradition than a medium. 'interactive software' is more of an easily definable term that encompasses, well, most computer programs. So whether you want to call your game a game or not has more to do with how you want to stretch the boundaries of the culture and tradition that is 'computer/video games'. It's up to you.

[medieval]

A game is a game if you can play it

[Liens]

A game is something you enjoy, in whatever form it takes!

Well, I enjoy eating and sleeping a lot. But that doesn't make this activity a game, does it?

Life is a game my friend   Playing until the day we go to the big Game Over in the sky.

Seriously though, this is a really tough topic.

If sleeping isn't a game, but getting into bed with the objective of "I must make sure to roll onto my left side exactly 5 times!!" makes it 'gameify-d', are you going to enjoy that sleep more just because it has the proper things a 'game' should have?  I know I wouldn't.
That's something I often get conflicted with when making games, I don't understand the 'achievement hunters' who believe a game is better simply because it has obligatory tasks to up the 'fun factor'.  If a game plays like another game but isn't necessarily stuffed full of meaningless collectables, or is abstract?  I'd still consider it a game.
Just like how modern art is still considered art =P

[beestings]

What struck me most about the OP was the explicitly male point of view. Play as a boy, help a male bartender (with woman issues), help an old man (with woman issues). Watch out for the male-centric story telling and you'll get a more living game.

With regards to the question: what makes a game a game? I'm with C.A. Who cares? It's a fuzzy label applied to a bunch of stuff in order to make it easier to talk about. Depending on the context it can mean different things. In this context, you can use it as "something interactive on a computer" and that's fine.

edit: if you think you can establish a universal definition, you need to study some philosophy of language

there are other female stories I've also thought about but didn't both mentioning, one is about a woman who is confident and hardworking and is getting involve with a girl around town, if you talk either character you gain incite on their relationships and the town itself (same goes between most character dialogue). There's a man whose trying to find god to help put his life together and a sporadic amount of other tragic characters who learn about and allow to develop.

Another part involves a homeless man who is infamous for telling the kids around town crazy stories, and while he tells you one (if you happen to reach that dialogue anyways), he tells the character a story in unique perspectives that are semi-interact able and vivid. Idk, its more of a project that evokes emotion and atmosphere rather than tradition game views... awesome input though!

[Dacke]

I'm sure you'll figure it out. But if you find yourself mostly telling things from a male point of view, don't be afraid to gender swap a few characters. It'll probably help you find out interesting things about how you tell stories