I can't vouch that these games are any good, but if it's on wiicade, it can be played with only the mouse.

Also, I'm pretty sure you can get by with the just the mouse in the Fallout games.

If it doesn't feel indie, does that mean it feels as if it was made by a large studio? I'm not seeing what you're getting at here.

Caravaneer (which I just submitted to the database) deserves to be featured. It's developed from scratch in Flash, and it's like no game I've seen before or since. Imagine it, if you will, as the beautiful, healthy child of Fallout and the Oregon Trail. It's difficult to get the hang of at first, but there's a lot of depth and freedom there once you do. I can't recommend it enough.

Is that game made by you? Because there's a gentleman policy that you don't submit your own games here.

Caravaneer is made by Dmitry Zheltobruikhov. It says so on the title screen of the game. My name is not Dmitry Zheltobruikhov. It is Craig Stern. But I can see how you'd get them confused.

Bueller? Bueller?...

Wow, that Heartland interview was intense. I think it's a shame that game was never completed: I think there's something special about a game that will challenge the people who play it on a psychological level.

Sure, you've got Gandhi, but can he beat...Blondie??!

Ooh, good question. I've got to go with sweet, I think.

I've just released a turn-based tactics game called Telepath: Psy Arena. Rather than give you a whole long intro about it, I'll let you play it and tell me what you think. It uses the same combat system as Telepath RPG Chapter 3, so any feedback you have for me on Psy Arena me will be useful to me as I continue development.

Here are some screenshots:

I'm kind of wondering if an RPG without levels could work. The idea is that the player ends the game with the same predefined stats he starts with, bosses and enemies are designed around these stats to provide a steady difficulty curve. Defeating a boss would be more a matter of finding or exploiting a weakness than being the correct level. I guess a different reward system for defeating enemies would have to used.

Sure--that's pretty much how Zelda: A Link to the Past does things. You have very limited opportunities in-game to permanently improve your character's stats, so the game designers will always have a reasonably good sense of how strong you are when it's time to face any given boss.

For the user there is no advantage.

If there's no middle man taking a cut, he can charge less. That's an advantage to the user.

[waffle waffle waffle] ... but I'm much more concerned with whether my games are enjoyable to play, flow well, draw the player in with compelling characters and story, and address the broader themes I want to address.

What sort of themes?

Telepath RPG Chapter 2's overarching theme is one of freedom vs. loyalty. It plays out in different ways with each of the characters, depending on how you play the game, and can result in one of two endings.

BTW, I am a huge fan of waffles.

I don't think the "what makes a game art" discussion would necessarily have any effect on your game design at all, unless your primary goal was to create works of art (as opposed to simply making fun, enjoyable games).

Personally, I'd love it if my games were eventually viewed as art, but I'm much more concerned with whether my games are enjoyable to play, flow well, draw the player in with compelling characters and story, and address the broader themes I want to address.

[Disgaea 1/2]

Disgaea 1/2 Beautiful games with more than a lifetime worth of secret places, bosses and items

Also, Fallout 1/2 never really get old for me.

Likewise for System Shock 2.

I'm glad someone finally called out the idiots stoking the hype machine.

He's also an SA Goon. (I know theres a few of us on here)

Huh?

If you don't know, you don't deserve it be.

I don't "deserve it be"? Thats...um...too bad?

However, invoking feelings and making making you discover things about life, the world, and your self are far vaguer criteria. Both apply far more obviously for a lot of non-art than art. If you want some sadness, read the news. If you want to discover something about the world, I'm sure an atlas can help you out.

For your benefit, I'll repost the definition I actually offered: "art evokes emotions deliberately for the purpose of elevating (or deranging) the consciousness of the observer, accomplished through a representational medium."

Art is when artist creates something with a sole purpose of it being experienced.

That definition is easily torn down. First of all, if art is dependent on being created by an "artist," then you've built yourself a circular definition, since you then have to define "artist" (answer: someone who makes art). You can see how that doesn't clarify anything. Secondly, without the (rather useless) artist condition, that definition is way way way too broad. Is the numa numa guy video art? His sole purpose is for you to experience the video he's created. Likewise, suppose my sole purpose is for you to experience a fist in the face, and I punch you square in the nose. That's something, but it ain't art.

The point is, there have to be some things that are not art for the word art to have any useful meaning beyond "something that exists and can be experienced." So we're trying to hash out what is and isn't art in the context of gaming.

I'm glad someone finally called out the idiots stoking the hype machine.

He's also an SA Goon. (I know theres a few of us on here)

Huh?

I can keep my mind free of associations for a while. It's a technique I learned from meditation.

Speaking of which, I think being in a trance-like state while playing a shmup is close to the opposite of what makes a game art. You've shut off your higher processes and are playing solely on instinct, using parts of your brain focused around pattern recognition and twitch reflexes. What are you really discovering about life, the world, and your self while that's happening? Not much. Which isn't to say that it isn't really fun, or a really good gaming experience, you understand. I love games like that as much as anybody. It's just that I don't think that's the same thing as it being art.

Third World Farmer. Next!

You can't just post a link without telling us what it did right, what it did wrong and how we can use it to help us improve.

Oh, but I did. Look, if all we're talking about it using gaming to help people, we could just as easily get results by throwing together a Halo 3 tournament and donating the proceeds to charity. On the other hand, if what you're looking for is something unique to games that makes them a potential tool to help people, I think Third World Farmer kind of hit the nail on the head: use games as a means to make people experience things they've never experienced and become more aware of problems in the world. Third World Farmer is a game that lets you experience the frustration and despair of crushing poverty in the Third World, then exhorts you to act. The only way I can think of that it could be more effective would be to have a donation mechanism built into the game itself.

Heh. That was funny.