next »

[The Doctor]

Yes, it's been quite a while since I actually made a post, but let's see if I can come up with something valuable to talk about.

I notice that when it comes to music, and even with other forms of creation, limiting yourself can possibly help expand your ability. For instance, when limiting yourself to the simple 4 channeled NES chipset, you find yourself having to look for new and interesting ways to create something thought provoking. With PXTone, I had to come up with ways to make music through the limitations the software gave me. I didn't have the complete freedom of those who have money to buy expensive software, and I doubt I'd do much better with it. I find the limitations to be a stencil to work in.

I find that people often limit themselves in order to see what they can do. For instance, setting a very low limit on how much memory you can use to create a game. Or perhaps only using 4-8 colours for pixelart. People set these limits, and despite it, create new and wonderful things.

Is it that with complete freedom, we are faced with too many options in order to choose a right direction? Or is it simply we love the challenge of the boundaries we find ourselves in?

Let's discuss.

[Anthony Flack]

I'm a strong believer in working within limits. It creates tighter, more focused work, and I find that I'm more productive when working towards a rigidly defined outcome. I particularly enjoy working within limitations as a musician - such as finding new ways to make interesting live music with only three people and a small number of instruments. I'm kind of impatient to put together a bass, drums and synth group at the moment, and I'm thinking of heaps of ways that you could put those three instruments together.

With the games, I am sure that I'd benefit from more of this kind of thinking, too. Otherwise I tend to let things bloat out too much, and then I have to cut back again.  Which is fine I guess, but it's inefficient.

Anyway, yeah, I do like working within strict limits. It's fun. You can be cunning.

[Alex May]

Agreed with this totally. All of it. Limits are productive, fun and productive. And fun.

It's nice not to have limits too, though - good for setting out ideas and so forth, but I think that you have to set your limits out so that you don't get swamped by unlimited possibilities. Many of my theoretical designs get way out of hand because I don't put any limits on them and they get really out of hand really quickly.

[BenH]

My best stuff has definitely been created while having to work under limitations. Unfortunatly I don't seem to be able to set my own limitations, so I have to rely on other people to do it for me :D

[moi]

Limits are what make art. The beauty of art is in how the artist overcomes the limits.

[lowpoly]

setting limits on your projects is a good way to produce solid, focused work... as long as you're not purposely establishing those barriers because you are afraid to venture into new territory.

[PoV]

I'm somewhere between the extremes.  I think the best way to describe my mindset is, "I want no limitations, so I can set limitations".

Budget is a common limitation that's tough to get by, but I'm of the opinion work flow is worse.  I'm an oddball, in that I will invest as much as is needed in to the work flow.  Mind you, I do my homework first, so not to waste my money.

My book library is extensive covering all game related disciplines, my game and DVD libraries as well, and more recently my sample/virtual instrument library has grown significantly.

I suppose I've worked with limited tools long enough, that if there's a better way, I try to find it.

[Matthew]

I agree, and I'm surprised this didn't come up in the Game Creation Engines vs. Programming thread.  Limitation can be good!

[sergiocornaga]

I agree that with this limitation theory. In fact, I'm trying to make a game right now using only the drag and drop interface of Game Maker... 

[Pigbuster]

I agree, even though I totally don't follow that philosophy in any way.

I always aim too high and try to do everything and wind up doing nothing.

I know I really shouldn't do that, but I can't help myself.

[Kornel Kisielewicz]

*laughs*

If limitations breed originality, then us roguelike developers are the most inventious of y'all xP.

[PoV]

Yes, some of you are crazy enough to still use ASCII.  :D

But a good design should stand out even without pretty graphics.  Pretty graphics is just how we get people to buy it.

[Robotacon]

 

[Alec]

inhales slowly


duuuuuuuuude

[Bezzy]

But a good design should stand out even without pretty graphics.

Almost true! Some game mechanics cannot exist without a requisite level of fidelity.

Pretty graphics is just how we get people to buy it.

Uh-oh!

[Alec]

Aww, I was just kiddin' 

[Jason S. Longia]

Firstly, for the glory of necroposting, i'm sure I want to reply.

Secondly, with limitations, when it comes to samples or the types of instruments
you use. I use soundfonts and sample and resample them, I change the sample pitch
to give them unique sounds. I add delays, reverbs, EQ, chorus to them,
anything to keep my small set of resources, whilst creating more out of very little.
I record sounds and run them through the sampler.

I agree with Anthony about the "tighter more focused work" when doing this. I have
and it's honestly worked for the better. But it also helps to brush up on theory,
Theory + limitation = unlimited uses of limitation.

[Taky]

Designing in self imposed limitations is one of my favourite go to practices. First, I find the ideas come easier - second, limitations are usually good when it comes to managing scope of anything that might go into the game. I call this a two-fer