next »

[Chromanoid]

Perhaps Derek, like many creative people, we sometimes just get stuck and fall into a rut. Some game developers that spend a lot of time playing other people's games get scared into thinking that they may steal an idea. I suppose it's the idea if your game turned out being like someone else's game you could safely say "I never played his game, so I didn't copy it!". But I think it's a shame that if a game developer doesn't play other people's games, then it can lead to a lack of growth in creative development skills (i.e, I might still think that the best method to do x is always x and will always be x ... till of course someone else comes up with y.)

btw this innovation at all costs belief is a typical western culture thing ^^. if you have such fears you should look at Kaizen the japanese/asian way of producing things .

[astrospoon]

I think one key (as opposed to "the key") might be to think slightly past a 1:1 conversion.  In other words, if you come up with the theme "underground railroad" there's no need to develop an "underground railroad" game but to think about things that are tangential to the theme. (e.g. gardening -> Pikmin)

It is funny that you mention Pikmin, as I almost mentioned Miyamoto in my first post. It seems much of his success as a designer comes from the ability to pull ideas from non game related activities and turn them into compelling, new experiences. This pattern going all the way back to the original Zelda. But I don't always think identifying the key bit of "fun" in an activity and then translating that into workable game mechanics is a trivial task at all, which is precisely why it is so easy to fall back into existing frameworks when thinking about how a certain theme may make a good game.

Regarding the inbreeding of video game ideas in general, I don't think it's really an issue.

I think the inbreeding of mechanics in games isn't an issue at all. Much like you would never criticize a movie for using panning shots of a landscape, or reaction shots, games shouldn't be targeted because they include a jump button, or represent the player with some sort of avatar. The language and tools of the medium include these things for a reason, and they have developed over time. They are, quite simply, the foundation on which most games are built upon.

I'm just curious why it seems to be such a big deal to bring in "outside" ideas in video games, when there are clearly many outside ideas (or completely new, fantastical ones) already present in every game.  I'm just theorizing that at its root it has something to do with cultural shame over video games and fantasy in general.

I actually think it would be quite easy to make a case for the inbreeding of video game ideas in general. Space marines, pointy-haired swordsmen, etc. etc. Too many games are spawned from: "It's like game A but with B instread of C, and a little bit of D".

Name a topic: Air Traffic control, Figure Skating, Winning the Lottery, Locked-in syndrome, Prostitution, Animal Abuse, Garbage Men, Terminal Illness.

The fact is, movies (and books, and poetry, and music) have explored a much wider breadth of human existence than games have. Part of this stems from the age of the mediums, I agree. But I think the cultural shame, or at least, a good portion of the shame I have for video games, comes from the action/fantasy rut that the industry is having trouble pulling itself out of.  

[nikki]

Shamefully I can't remember where or when i've heard/read it , but i heard/read somewhere that one of the greatest differences between video-games and other art-forms is that videogames have never been in astate of crisis.
I mean since the 70's more and more money has been earned by doin more and more of the same, first a major crisis has to hit this industry before alot of total new ways of dealing with your possibilities opens up.

One could argue that the indie-game scene has all the cards to this new way, but if i look at what it has achieved, and especially here,  it is mainly a polished down version of long before explored paths. This is not a bad thing, i mean if it works it works, and surely there are the exceptions to this rule. like braid, come to think of it isn't braid just mario with a twist ?

[Captain_404]

I mean since the 70's more and more money has been earned by doin more and more of the same, first a major crisis has to hit this industry before alot of total new ways of dealing with your possibilities opens up.

This is basically not at all true. Videogames were nearly wiped out commercially in the Atari-era crash.

Anyway, inspiration for me often comes from writing. Right now it's the Great Gatsby, Wallace Stevens, and The Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock. I'm sure that's bound to change with time though.

Art tends to be a big thing for me too, most often I find myself having to visualize how a game looks before how it plays. (not that I believe art > gameplay, it's just that the two are so inextricably intertwined for me)

[nikki]

i didn't know that 
must have been because of my lack of knowledge of the usa specific game market.
sorry.

ok i'll restate :

I mean since the 83's more and more money has been earned by doin more and more of the same, first a major crisis has to hit this industry before alot of total new ways of dealing with your possibilities opens up.

[Snakey]

btw  this innovation at all costs belief is a typical western culture thing ^^. if you have such fears you should look at Kaizen the japanese/asian way of producing things .

Yeah, I'm looking into that sort of avenue now. I'm working on two games right now, both are looking at older games that I enjoyed a lot in the past (Chaos Engine, Gods) and looking at reiterating those titles to perhaps make them more fun or interesting considering the hardware restrictions they had in the past.

I generally disagree that games are solely an art form. This is because first and fore most, games are entertainment. Art doesn't always have to entertain, for example, I don't see how putting the Virgin Mary in a condom is entertainment ... but I suppose it could be considered to be an art form.

Because of that 'restriction', we as game developers first and foremost try to make a game that is fun; where as artists of other forms try to create an expression.

[J. R. Hill]

or snapping myself with long rubber bands.

mmm i never tought of S&M as a source of inspiration. if it work it ok for me  

It's not like that!

[gimymblert]

I generally disagree that games are solely an art form. This is because first and fore most, games are entertainment.

I think in game development we live in a confusion because of the NAME: GAME.

The problem is that we use the same word to describe the same form but not the same goal that is imply the name of the form. As long we use "game" it imply traditionnaly FUN. But just like ikea manual are basically comics (sequential image that communicate) but not named that way (because traditionally we attach narrative expectation to comics), the same way "comics" are not about comedy, gameshould not be solely about FUN!

Game are about nothing until told so!

It's a game about fun! it's a game about feeling age! it's a game about marriage! it's a game about the passage of time ...

People who seek fun in game PLENTY
Those who seek something different NO PLENTY
I think that this kind of 'restriction' is more a communication tropes to create more "focus" on a boundaries to be push by actively promoting and "assigning" task force to one problematic.

If ART in game was a practice we had completely master and was well diffuse and accepted, we would have something else to "push".

And also counter reaction (like yours) help define more clearly the concept he "oppose" and lead to cleaner design in the reacting "tropes" (here fun).

Not counting borderline case that mix conflicting goal (masocore or bullet hell as a definition of FUN, art, and retro)

[gimymblert]

i didn't know that 
must have been because of my lack of knowledge of the usa specific game market.
sorry.

ok i'll restate :

I mean since the 83's more and more money has been earned by doin more and more of the same, first a major crisis has to hit this industry before alot of total new ways of dealing with your possibilities opens up.

Well this was a hot topic during the play station era and are resurfacing now. The good news is that the industry did take notes and react:
That's how the casual industry have bloom
This is how social gaming had start
That's why nintendo had made the WII and the DS, and the kind of wii fit.

It's just as gamer, we tend to disregard BOLD innovation because they shift out our reference frame! Compare animal crossing gameplay to fallout 3 and you will see many innovation (hint: animal crossing have more player playing steadily it than fallout 3). There is many HUGE seller that does not make the headline of gaming site!

[Snakey]

neoshaman

[gimymblert]

sorry  my mind just go BOOM from time to time 

[Parthon]

I get a lot of theme inspiration from music, especially when the music creates a perfect atmosphere for the perfect setting.

As for game mechanics, I don't gain much from real life. Because:

Game mechanics are very abstract. Some of the same mechanics come from real life, like jumping, but are used in completely different ways. Even if we take a realistic game like a sports game or Modern Warfare 2 the controls have been abstracted, even if the gameplay closely resembles real life. This makes it hard to gain inspiration from real life, unless you are making a realistic game. Even games with 'physics' are really the player interacting with an abstracted version.

So where to get inspiration for gameplay mechanics? My crazy crazy brain. It comes up with some really crazy stuff sometimes.

[agj]

Melly: There's no trick to it. Just live a fuller, richer life with more stimulation. Seek out to do more things that you don't normally do.

[Shade Jackrabbit]

I find cooking and baking can be very inspiring, oddly enough. Also putting together music videos. I think it's just trying something new and going on an adventure, getting those juices flowing. Once they are, one can do something with them.

[Lon]

A good walk in the wood  or playing music is good for me.

Walking or music can inspire some interesting ideas for games for me as well.

Traveling and exploring works well.  Experiencing something new, interesting or exciting gets my creative juices flowing.  Discussions with friends can help as well.  Work, school or dreams can be inspirational if they are exciting and/or interesting.

[Chromanoid]

Melly: There's no trick to it. Just live a fuller, richer life with more stimulation. Seek out to do more things that you don't normally do.

actually there are tricks you can learn: ie brainstorming and many other creativity techniques and they work! if you really lack ideas, try it - especially together with people who aren't into gaming (they can not say this theme with classical jrpg controls).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creativity_techniques
(if you can speak german, try the german wikipedia article. it is of better quality)

[Chromanoid]

I generally disagree that games are solely an art form. This is because first and fore most, games are entertainment. Art doesn't always have to entertain, for example, I don't see how putting the Virgin Mary in a condom is entertainment ... but I suppose it could be considered to be an art form.

it depends on your definition of art and games . if art is allowed to have restrictions then games are art. if interactive experiences without fun are games, games are art. if art should have no restrictions and interactive experiences without fun aren't games maybe i would agree with you.
but i see this entertainment restriction for literature too. books don't entertain everybody but they have to create at least a kind of curiosity that somebody will read them.

[jwaap]

alcohol/drugs

Also I just wrote an essay about how games lacked innovation, and game designers shouldn't play games because they are influenced by them anyway. So hereby I declare I will not play anymore games for the rest of my life.

[Melly]

@Derek:

I don't really feel that the inbreeding is a bad thing by default. To build upon and perfect ideas pioneered by other people will always have its place in gaming, as it does in any medium. What I'm saying is that we have plenty of that, and, in my opinion, not enough people looking to pioneer those new ideas. Like it's been mentioned there's a huge range of concepts games have barely, if ever, touched.

And this is not a discussion on "games are art" or "games have/don't have to be fun" so lets please not deviate to that direction and just focus on inspiration and new ideas.

Recently I started trying to implement some of those techniques, like the random words one. I get 3 random words and try to think of concepts that encompass them. It's interesting how it makes you think in directions you don't usually go to, because you force yourself to think of things that aren't directly inside your circle of interests.

[brog]

Slightly OT, but I believe one of the reasons games often seem a bit inbred is that if you start from the perspective of making up interesting game mechanics, and then you try to justify them with a setting in which they make sense, you're very often going to end up with a fantasy or sci-fi setting, just because it gives you the excuse of either "magic" or "advanced tech" to explain things that don't make sense in real life.  So innovation in mechanics, combined with insisting on actually having a consistent setting rather than just being abstract or surreal, very naturally leads to these same types of setting being used.  (It does help that lots of us making games are 'nerds' and totally love wizards and spaceships anyway, but I think that's not the main thing, the medium itself pushes towards it.)