Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Game Design & Concepts » S/NES style games

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
 1   2   3 
S/NES style games
inspiredmarine
Member #7,979
November 2006

This post is a general game design question..... what makes a game "fun"? Although there is no specific answer to this question, how wide of an audience still prefers the 2D graphics to the newer 3D style? How much interactivity do you need in order to be considered popular? If, let's say, a game were to be based on the old NES game "North vs South" would an audience like to have more control of what they can do or would it be better to have pre-determined actions that the player can carry out at certain times?

There's no specific answer to these questions, but my belief is that there is still an audience for older-style games. Is it possible to make money off these games? Possible, I do believe, but not likely to make you rich :)

The game design I have come up with is based on the NES game North vs South, with a little twist. Although for now I am hesitant to actually release the details of the game, I do plan to release the game on the site under "The Depot," but take heed - this game is still in the beginning phases.

Feel free to add input and/or answer questions of your own...

ImLeftFooted
Member #3,935
October 2003
avatar

A game is made by fun by having all the little things polished. That and lots of fancy particle effects / shiny things.

ReyBrujo
Moderator
January 2001
avatar

Casual gamers prefer 2D games, just like hardcore ones liked them 10 years ago. A Flash game does not need to be 3D to gather a lot of players.

Quote:

Although for now I am hesitant to actually release the details of the game

I like secrets 8-)

--
RB
光子「あたしただ…奪う側に回ろうと思っただけよ」
Mitsuko's last words, Battle Royale

Thomas Harte
Member #33
April 2000
avatar

Quote:

based on the NES game North vs South

Do you mean North and South? If so then I think there is definitely still a strong audience for them, although as ReyBrujo implies, most people get their fill from Flash than from stuff they actually have to download.

If not then I guess it depends on the complexity. I doubt anyone much would be that interested in a new Circus Charlie but stuff like Contra/Gryzor/Probotector still has an audience.

Mark Oates
Member #1,146
March 2001
avatar

I know that head bosses tend to make a game more fun. They add a climactic shape to the overall ebb and flow, which helps sustain the interest for a longer period of time.

--
Visit CLUBCATT.com for cat shirts, cat mugs, puzzles, art and more <-- coupon code ALLEGRO4LIFE at checkout and get $3 off any order of 3 or more items!

AllegroFlareAllegroFlare DocsAllegroFlare GitHub

Simon Parzer
Member #3,330
March 2003
avatar

It's the little details that make a game fun.
Example: You have a boring card game. You add shiny effects and a few game modes. You add a little animated dog who explains the game. You make the graphics really beautiful. You add a cool soundtrack. This makes your game fun. You could even sell it if everything is nice and polished.
Other example: Very thought-out game with a really complex storyline. Innovative design and gameplay. More that 100 hours of playing time. No one plays it because it has ugly graphics and no sound effects.

Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
avatar

Good looks attract players, good game mechanics (not necessarily complex) keep them playing. It's a balancing act, but I'd try to polish both to your best abilities.

---
Me make music: Triofobie
---
"We need Tobias and his awesome trombone, too." - Johan Halmén

axilmar
Member #1,204
April 2001

It's all about balance, actually. If the game elements are balanced, then the game is successful.

inspiredmarine
Member #7,979
November 2006

Yes I did mean the game "North and South"

Also, I believe that if a game appeals to a large audience due to playing off world conflicts and perhaps even politics, then it will be successful :)

Also, there is no "one - end all, be all" way to ensure success when designing and creating a game. If you're writing a game for money, then you've already started on the wrong foot. Everything should be to your liking, as you are the designer, and should be unique from your own creativity.

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Thomas Harte
Member #33
April 2000
avatar

Quote:

Yes I did mean the game "North and South"

Oh, well I love that game! I've not played the NES version, but the three I have played were all identical so I doubt if that really means anything. I'd be very grateful if there were a remake/new game based on a similar premise!

Michael Jensen
Member #2,870
October 2002
avatar

Quote:

It's the little details that make a game fun.

Totally, there was an NES version of Monopoly -- every computer, SNES, playstation, whatever, port I've played has not lived up to the NES version which was filled with animation, music, and even voice (when you got out of jail it would say "Don't be comming back now!" -- yes on the NES!) If I'm to play an electronic version of monopoly, it's that one.

Also, Advance Wars is fun on Gameboy, but it's also really neat at first cause the music sounds cool, and there's this vixen to explain the rules and stuff to you, and a story and it just seems so neat -- Advance Wars 2? Didn't seem as polished to me and I never really liked it as much...

William Labbett
Member #4,486
March 2004
avatar

Seems to me that noone really knows what makes games fun, which is why people go on and on forever making more games, trying to see if this or that works.

ReyBrujo
Moderator
January 2001
avatar

The definition of "fun" depends on the individual's taste, of course. But personally, and I guess for most of us who had grown up before 2000, simple games can be fun. I take great join in browsing The Underdogs for old 80 and 90 classics, regardless of how outdated they look.

Some games fit better for a determined media, console or situation than others. In example, Pokémon is a very good game for handhelds, but in home consoles it is not as appealing. Party games are nice to play between several friends in a single screen, but FPS are usually an over-internet experience. In some games you prefer voice chatting with your team members, like in FPS, while in others you prefer a more abstract experience, like in MMORPGs.

It is not worth putting "restrictions" to games. In example, by saying that a fun game needs to have multiplayer, you are dismissing any single player one.

--
RB
光子「あたしただ…奪う側に回ろうと思っただけよ」
Mitsuko's last words, Battle Royale

William Labbett
Member #4,486
March 2004
avatar

Quote:

and I guess for most of us who had grown up before 2000, simple games can be fun.

Yup. I recently bought Stalker, shadow of chenobyl and Elder Scrolls III and although they're very technically accomplished I've hardly played them at all.
Who enjoys reading instruction manuals ?
All the arcade games came with none at all or just what the few buttons do. You had to figure the game out yourself.

Point worth making maybe - get rid of the tedious things in games to make the fun shine through. For me these are :-

  1. In game Tutorials.

  2. Bits where the control is taken over by the program for too long. ie cut scenes you can't skip, dialogue you can't skip etc.

ReyBrujo
Moderator
January 2001
avatar

I bought Etrian Odyssey, an old fashioned RPG game, very similar to Wizardry and the old AD&D games with a characteristic: you can draw the maps yourself in the Nintendo DS touchscreen. This is one thing I love, mapping things with pencil and paper. Another thing is analyzing passwords to find the way they are generated, to either start in the first level with the best possible equipment, or in the last one with no equipment at all. Games were pretty expensive down here, so I enjoyed the games in all possible ways, by finishing it, by creating maps, by analyzing passwords... there was no net access back then, so you had to do all what GameFAQs does by yourself.

I don't have enough free time to build faqs, but mapping is something I still do while playing MUDs, and the fact that Etrian Odyssey allows me to do that (even if it is in a limited way) it was too hard a temptation ;)

--
RB
光子「あたしただ…奪う側に回ろうと思っただけよ」
Mitsuko's last words, Battle Royale

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

William Labbett said:

Point worth making maybe - get rid of the tedious things in games to make the fun shine through. For me these are :-

1. In game Tutorials.
2. Bits where the control is taken over by the program for too long. ie cut scenes you can't skip, dialogue you can't skip etc.

I completely disagree with you. In game tutorials are great because you get walked through the controls (as opposed to reading the manual; though I have no problem doing so and always do anyway) and if done right it fits in with the story which helps to pull you into the game/story.

Cut scenes are not meant to be skipped. It's equivalent to skipping chapters of a book or movie. I watch every cut scene numerous times before I even consider skipping them (for most games I never do).

ReyBrujo
Moderator
January 2001
avatar

I am not against in-game tutorials or cut scenes, as long as you can skip them... I like playing games, not watching them :P The only cut scenes I always watch are the ending ones.

--
RB
光子「あたしただ…奪う側に回ろうと思っただけよ」
Mitsuko's last words, Battle Royale

Jeff Bernard
Member #6,698
December 2005
avatar

Heh, looks like several of you would never play Star Ocean Til the End of Time. It's an RPG with an extremely fun battle system, but there are really long cutscenes. Some cutscenes are over 30 minutes in length, and IIRC, you can't skip the cutscenes the first time you watch them.

I still enjoyed the game, though, because the storyline was pretty good, and the game was immensly fun outside of the cutscenes. If you can pull off those two, you can do pretty much anything with your game (including making the player wait an hour before they can do anything else).

--
I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.

Michael Jensen
Member #2,870
October 2002
avatar

Tactics Ogre does that, I can't stand it -- I turned it on to play it and bam a half an hour of boring meaningless cut scene with one battle at around 28 mins and then it started cut scening again, so I turned it off... That's ridiculous.

inspiredmarine
Member #7,979
November 2006

Yeah, cut scenes in the newer games have gotten ridiculous! For instance, games that are "based" off of movies have really long cut scenes. It wouldn't be so bad if the game didn't revolve around the movie and there was no way to skip the cut scenes. Cut scenes should be designed so that they supplement the game - not so they ARE the game. I agree with MJ on this one, ridiculously long cut scenes that you can't skip should be a no go. I like to be involved in the game, not letting the game play itself.

As for an update for the game I'm creating BASED off of North and South, I haven't had a chance to do any coding or graphics for it for the past few days (and won't for another few days) since I haven't had my computer with me. I've just recently played that game on the emulator and had a great idea to do a game based off of it. It's going to be written in C with allegro, with simplicity written all over it. I agree again that the first 30 mins to an hour of the game shouldn't be in-game tutorials aimed at learning the buttons. I love being able to start a game and immediately playing the game. There should be a working copy of the new game within a month or so, depending on the time I'm able to spend working on it.

Kitty Cat
Member #2,815
October 2002
avatar

Quote:

ridiculously long cut scenes should be a no go.

Fixed.

What are you doing, playing a game or watching a movie?

A good tutorial would ideally be a seperate "training" mode, or seamlessly worked in as the game's beginning levels if at all possible.

--
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will pee on your computer." -- Bruce Graham

Simon Parzer
Member #3,330
March 2003
avatar

Cutscenes are cool, but they should be very short and dramatic. Everything else is just boring.

A cutscene where a major character dies or where the world gets invaded by purple hamsters, that's awesome. What I hate are cutscenes where a few characters get together and just talk.

Derezo
Member #1,666
April 2001
avatar

I agree with Simon.
One game that suffered from "cutscene abuse" was Xenosaga for PS2, one of the early titles. It had a cutscene every time anything happened, and they were often very long. After 12 hours of "gameplay" I stopped playing because I had skipped so many cutscenes I didn't even understand the story anymore. Initially I was interested, too, I just got REALLY sick of the cutscenes and wanted to play the game! There are often multiple cutscenes in a row. In the time I played there were far more cutscenes than actual gameplay (probably by about 2:1 or 3:1 cutscenes:gameplay, and I'm not exaggerating).

"He who controls the stuffing controls the Universe"

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

I'm not against long cut scenes if they're done well enough, however, there should be a lot more game time then there is cut scene. In other words, if you have long cut scenes the game better last a while. ;D

Final Fantasy VII: Dirge Of Cerberus suffers from extensive cut scenes as well... X-Play destroyed it. 8-)

 1   2   3 


Go to: