next »

[moi]

It was a tailfin, dumbass.

[deadeye]

It was a tailfin, dumbass.

Keep your in-jokes where they belong, in your PANTS

[medieval]

Let's plan ahead then. I am very narcissistic so I'd like No-goal games.

[moi]

there are so many ideas now, we should just sell some of them to other websites.

[GregWS]

But we already have the next two compos planned out...

What are they?

Let's plan ahead then. I am very narcissistic so I'd like No-goal games.

Just thought I'd add that I'm still a huge fan of this idea.

[William Broom]

I would love no-goal as well, actually. It seems like most of the compos are themed around presentation: For example, B-games, VGNG, Lovecraft and Demakes don't really place any limitations on what kind of gameplay you can do, only on how it's presented. That's fine, but I think there should also be some that are based more around gameplay.

[GregWS]

That's a really good point chutup!

By making the compo about gameplay we'd be forced to explore and flush out whatever game style was chosen.

I think one of the big reasons I like "no goal games" is because even though it is a focused category, it can be approached from so many different angles.  Someone went into more detail about this at some point...

[Gainsworthy]

Yes... good point indeed. A balance between the presentation and gameplay would be nice.

PCG was more gameplay themed, whilst being open ended. I think No-Goal would fit the general idea as well. Yes.

Although, if we're going to (lengthily) postpone B-Games II in favour of another idea - which is a nice idea, I suppose - we should have a vote on it. Like last time we selected the year's compos.

[Terry]

I'm not sold on the zero player game, but I agree with chutup that it would be nice to have a contest with a gameplay restriction. 

[deadeye]

I'm not sold on the zero player game, but I agree with chutup that it would be nice to have a contest with a gameplay restriction. 

I really like the concept of a Zero Player game, but the more I think about it, having 50+ entries where you just sit back and watch with no (or little) interaction makes me wonder how, you know, fun that would be.  Sure, any one of them might be terribly fun on it's own, but a whole compo... it might bog down after a while.

And with the main focus on just watching what unfolds, I can also see a voter bias towards entries with prettier visuals, where in past compos that hasn't really been an issue.

[mildmojo]

I really like the concept of a Zero Player game, but the more I think about it, having 50+ entries where you just sit back and watch with no (or little) interaction makes me wonder how, you know, fun that would be.  Sure, any one of them might be terribly fun on it's own, but a whole compo... it might bog down after a while.

With a (small) resolution restriction, you could probably run a dozen of them at the same time, tiled across the screen. 

Speaking of running games simultaneously, what about getting all the games in a compo to "snap together", so that your actions in one affect others?  Different games with disparate gameplay types, but with some sort of common message passing system?  At its simplest, you could pair with another competitor and make your games able to read each other's saved game states.  At its most complex, there could be a networked hub server capable of routing or broadcasting messages between connected games.

Kinda like digital stick people.

If the games were alike (say, adventure games), your character could walk off the screen in one game and onto the screen of another game.

[moi]

How did we get from "no-goal" to "zero player"? 

Also

I'm not sold on the zero player game, but I agree with chutup that it would be nice to have a contest with a gameplay restriction. 

I really like the concept of a Zero Player game, but the more I think about it, having 50+ entries where you just sit back and watch with no (or little) interaction makes me wonder how, you know, fun that would be.  Sure, any one of them might be terribly fun on it's own, but a whole compo... it might bog down after a while.

And with the main focus on just watching what unfolds, I can also see a voter bias towards entries with prettier visuals, where in past compos that hasn't really been an issue.

Good point!
So the compo should be "goal-less game that can be played in one/two minutes max"

[William Broom]

I should hope that No Goal and Zero Player are two different competitions.

[GregWS]

Yeah, those are two different compo ideas, and mixing them would be a terrible idea.

I think my main problem with Zero Player is that it technically isn't a game.  A game is taking place, and you get to watch it, but it isn't actually a game per-se.  I think it's sort of like watching sports; there's a game but you aren't directly involved.  And unless we all become incredible at coding AI, a zero player game would be hard to make interesting; you need smart AI for an interesting game to take place.

I really do think we should vote, but maybe we should decide on a short list first, and the originator of each idea on the short list could summarize their argument for their compo.  Sorry if this is too formal an idea for TIGs; I've never been around during the selection process before.

[ithamore]

there are so many ideas now, we should just sell some of them to other websites.

That gave me the hardest whisper-laugh I've had in a long time. (It's nap time, and my daughter is fighting sleep.)

[deadeye]

How did we get from "no-goal" to "zero player"? 

They're both suggestions in this thread? 

[GregWS]

I think it was because the transition from talking about one to talking about the other was rather abrupt.

[medieval]

Also I may want to add that I got the idea to start my no-goal game from this.

But I am still a narcissistic bastard.

[Gainsworthy]

Ah, just discovered Fly Guy? Wonderful.

There's another brilliant No-Goal flash... thingy (game? toy?) which I discovered a while back. Possibly from here. I think it was called "head" or "face". There was a head. It was blue. Things came out of it. If someone could link to it, that'd be dandy. Lots of really nice toys on the site, actually.


BELOW YOU: Yeees. That'd be the one. Brilliant little thing. Thanks PoliceDanceClub! (on a side note, it feels completely wrong to abbreviate PoliceDanceClub. Just sayin').

[policedanceclub]

http://www.vectorpark.com/head/

I love that thing.