Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1362058 Posts in 63521 Topics- by 55403 Members - Latest Member: Fairnin

June 26, 2019, 03:18:51 PM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsCommunityTownhallForum IssuesArchived subforums (read only)CreativeDisplacing 'fun' from the game designer's lexicon
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]
Print
Author Topic: Displacing 'fun' from the game designer's lexicon  (Read 20576 times)
Strong
Level 1
*


Umm... okay.


View Profile
« Reply #100 on: January 11, 2009, 11:54:08 AM »

The fact is, no matter how morality-focused or story-driven they can be, video games are still games. Being fun is pretty much in the definition.

If it is in the definition then it is not a game if it is not fun. I'd be surprised if that is what you mean (i.e. if you don't think there are any games in existence that are not fun). I'd say being fun or enjoyable or some such tends to be part of their purpose though.
Yeah, I do mean that a video game that isn't fun isn't a video game. It is something, but the fact is it it isn't fun- if it doesn't have any elements of fun or try to be fun in the first place- than it isn't a game, because games in general are fun, video or not.
Logged
Gnarf
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #101 on: January 11, 2009, 02:34:33 PM »

It helps sell more.

Sure. I can see that there's a relation between broad appeal and sales. It's just that I haven't said anything about what makes games sell more, what makes them good, or any effects of having broad appeal. If sales is what he's getting at, I've no idea what that has got to do with the text he quoted before saying that. I'm not sure if it's supposed to contradict what I said or if it is some kind of neat additional information about broad appeal or whatever.

Yeah, I do mean that a video game that isn't fun isn't a video game.

Um... okay. That sounds like it has some interesting consequences. I find some videogames to be fun or not fun depending on my mood, how much I've played them, etc.
Logged

This is IT -- the missing link in the chain of my existence. Rondo's SPINNING BUDDHA is what I need to make me complete.
Biggerfish
Guest
« Reply #102 on: January 11, 2009, 04:05:44 PM »

Too be honest I don't think people should go about saying what they think a game should or should not have. Everyone has their own opinions on the subject and who has the right to say what a game should or should not have? I can easily come and say that games should use no less than 3 buttons for input and I don't see any difference in that than saying that games should be "fun".

I see the definition of games to be like the definition of music. It varies from person to person and from culture to culture, there are certainly things some people call music that others don't bat an eyelid as dismissing as rubbish and there is no standard definition for it. Same with games, everyone has a general idea as to what they are, but we are lost on specifics.

The fact is, no matter how morality-focused or story-driven they can be, video games are still games. Being fun is pretty much in the definition.

If it is in the definition then it is not a game if it is not fun. I'd be surprised if that is what you mean (i.e. if you don't think there are any games in existence that are not fun). I'd say being fun or enjoyable or some such tends to be part of their purpose though.
Yeah, I do mean that a video game that isn't fun isn't a video game. It is something, but the fact is it it isn't fun- if it doesn't have any elements of fun or try to be fun in the first place- than it isn't a game, because games in general are fun, video or not.
I don't find Mega Man fun, is it still a video game?

(Though, for what it's worth, you're making something that appeals to just a certain collective of people by making a game.)
Uh, there's a reason Wii Sports is now the #1 selling video game ever now. Nintendo realized that they could appeal to more than just the 20% of people on earth who play video games. And their broader appeal worked, and now there's a Wii in every fucking home anywhere. See how broader appeal helps?
Helps them sell. Just because you are able to appeal to a wider audience, there is nothing that says you should. People make games for different reasons and I don't think you should tell them what they should aim for when making a game. I might want to make a game that hardcore shmup players find fun, why should I try to broaden my appeal if I have a specific market in mind?
Logged
OmniMuffin
Level 1
*


To the gallows I say!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #103 on: January 11, 2009, 04:16:29 PM »

I think fun means something that is enjoyable and something you will remember
Logged
Strong
Level 1
*


Umm... okay.


View Profile
« Reply #104 on: January 11, 2009, 04:55:35 PM »

You don't have to find it enjoyable personally, but it has to try to be enjoyable. Some aspect of the game has to be fun to some people.
Logged
OmniMuffin
Level 1
*


To the gallows I say!


View Profile WWW
« Reply #105 on: January 11, 2009, 06:09:41 PM »

You don't have to find it enjoyable personally, but it has to try to be enjoyable. Some aspect of the game has to be fun to some people.
Exactly!
Logged
Lucaz
Level 6
*


Indier than thou


View Profile WWW
« Reply #106 on: January 12, 2009, 11:22:00 AM »

You don't have to find it enjoyable personally, but it has to try to be enjoyable. Some aspect of the game has to be fun to some people.

Are you saying games have to be enjoyable, or fun? 'Cause those aren't the same thing. Lots of games are enjoyable but not fun. I can enjoy Master of Orion or Civilization, but I don't think anyone will say they have fun with them. I mean enjoying something is like "That was good, I liked it", and fun is like "Haha, that was fun!".
Logged

Biggerfish
Guest
« Reply #107 on: January 13, 2009, 07:06:54 PM »

You don't have to find it enjoyable personally, but it has to try to be enjoyable. Some aspect of the game has to be fun to some people.
What gives you the right to say what games should and should not have?
Logged
Strong
Level 1
*


Umm... okay.


View Profile
« Reply #108 on: January 14, 2009, 09:35:31 AM »

You don't have to find it enjoyable personally, but it has to try to be enjoyable. Some aspect of the game has to be fun to some people.
What gives you the right to say what games should and should not have?
The dictionary, under the definition of the word "game".

Don't misinterpret any of this as saying that I think certain games have more merits than others, because I don't. I just use the more literal translation of the word "game".
Logged
Gnarf
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #109 on: January 14, 2009, 09:59:16 AM »

The dictionary, under the definition of the word "game".

Which definition? "Game" has several meanings.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/game

When we're talking about videogames, I'd say the most fitting one is:

Quote
[2.]a. A competitive activity or sport in which players contend with each other according to a set of rules: the game of basketball; the game of gin rummy.
Logged

This is IT -- the missing link in the chain of my existence. Rondo's SPINNING BUDDHA is what I need to make me complete.
Biggerfish
Guest
« Reply #110 on: January 15, 2009, 02:28:09 AM »

You don't have to find it enjoyable personally, but it has to try to be enjoyable. Some aspect of the game has to be fun to some people.
What gives you the right to say what games should and should not have?
The dictionary, under the definition of the word "game".

Don't misinterpret any of this as saying that I think certain games have more merits than others, because I don't. I just use the more literal translation of the word "game".
My apologies then.  Embarrassed (Also for sounding rude)

But I don't agree with the idea that it has to fun for it to be a video game. If the only thing that differs between it and a "regular" game is the intention of the developer(s) (they don't aim to make it fun), then what is it?

When we're talking about videogames, I'd say the most fitting one is:

Quote
[2.]a. A competitive activity or sport in which players contend with each other according to a set of rules: the game of basketball; the game of gin rummy.
I don't think that really fits at all. There are many single player games and games that aren't played to be competitive, but moreso played for enjoyment (RPG's, say, aren't competitive).

Logged
Gnarf
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #111 on: January 15, 2009, 04:04:47 AM »

In the last single player RPG I played, bunch of goblins tried to kill my party, but I totally wouldn't let them so I tried to kill them first. You could say we were competing against each other. In the last multiplayer RPG I played, we got to enter little arenas and compete against other players.

You still tend to play to win, no matter if your competition is human or not. And the games where you don't are often called non-games or toys or something.
Logged

This is IT -- the missing link in the chain of my existence. Rondo's SPINNING BUDDHA is what I need to make me complete.
Jad
Level 8
***


Bomb Boy


View Profile WWW
« Reply #112 on: January 15, 2009, 08:59:27 AM »

Thus, you somehow need to change the definition so that the challenge and competition does not explicitely involve other players O:

I found this definition on the same page:

"6.  Informal
a. An active interest or pursuit, especially one involving competitive engagement or adherence to rules.

Oh well, I'm wrong, it seems. This seems to be the informal variant where you call non-games 'the game', etc.

Then if you are to follow the topmost definition on the page: "1.  An activity providing entertainment or amusement; a pastime: party games; word games.", then they supposedly have to be entertaining/amusing
« Last Edit: January 15, 2009, 09:03:30 AM by Jad » Logged
Lucaz
Level 6
*


Indier than thou


View Profile WWW
« Reply #113 on: January 15, 2009, 09:44:39 AM »

Considering game isn't a technical word, using a dictionary definition to decide what is a game and what isn't is quite unadequate and limiting.
Logged

Jad
Level 8
***


Bomb Boy


View Profile WWW
« Reply #114 on: January 15, 2009, 12:51:25 PM »

Surely you lie! Language is not created by humans, it is created by dictionaries! (jadspam stops here. sorry)
Logged
LaserBeing
Level 0
**


it's laser time boyzz


View Profile
« Reply #115 on: January 15, 2009, 10:18:37 PM »

I just lost The Game.
Logged
Gnarf
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #116 on: January 18, 2009, 02:26:25 PM »

Thus, you somehow need to change the definition so that the challenge and competition does not explicitely involve other players O:

Or consider the computer/game to be the other player(s). Or whatever.

I didn't really mean to say that it's the ultimate definition of "game" that sorts everything out. Just that that out of the ones on that particular site, that is the one that gets at the meaning of "game" in "videogame". That videogames are called games for the same reason that soccer and chess are called games, and not for the same reason that "a game of pretending" is called a game or for the same reason that some rabbit or something is called game.
Logged

This is IT -- the missing link in the chain of my existence. Rondo's SPINNING BUDDHA is what I need to make me complete.
Anthony Flack
Level 5
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #117 on: January 19, 2009, 03:01:05 PM »

I thought we were in the business of making interactive computer entertainment?
Logged

Currently in development: Cletus Clay
Gnarf
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #118 on: January 19, 2009, 03:07:37 PM »

And a subset of that "we" are in the business of making computer games?
Logged

This is IT -- the missing link in the chain of my existence. Rondo's SPINNING BUDDHA is what I need to make me complete.
Shambrook
Level 3
***



View Profile WWW
« Reply #119 on: January 19, 2009, 06:13:58 PM »

I just lost The Game.

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU


I just lost the game....

Personly I don't think this conversation is meta enough, I think we should really examine the merits of changing the spelling of fun to a less phoneticly correct phun could be used to differentiate diffrent kinds of fun or phun experienced while playing a video game.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic