Filtering out good game ideas from bad ones

#1 That's just comon sense. Some people have it, some people don't, but they'll learn soon enough.
-Ajari-

#2 I have a comment about the 2nd filter.

You shouldn't just throw away the scenario idea. You should keep it around, but put in a your scenario file instead of in your game idea file.

However, your filters are all a good idea. I've been applying the first and third filters as a reflex, but I've been guilty of not using the 2nd filter from time-to-time.

#3 Instead of canning the idea because it doesnt match a filter, you should change the idea until it does match. Like if you have a broad scenario idea, try and see the gameplay possibilties within it and extend the idea until it matches your criteria for a doable game.

#4 @Joshua

There is a great article on Gamasutra.com by Ernest Adams about the concept of "Building from the Ground Up" that you might be interested in. It discusses the idea that sometimes you have nothing more than a "Feature" or an "Idea" that you attempt to build a game around rather than a Game Idea that you want to put features into.

He pretty much pans Sim Tower in this fashion

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20041018/adams_01.shtml

You might have to be a member to read the article.

#5

Quote:Bottom-up game design is an elementary mistake, usually made by programmers and other people who like to build worlds and fiddle with them. It is [a design error]: failing to put the player first. A videogame's purpose is to create enjoyment for the player through gameplay, so good game design always begins with the player. It doesn't begin with the puzzles, or the art, or the story...

@Eric: Great article, thanks for the link.

#6 That's strange I always start up with a scenario and then take existing game genres and figure out which one can tell the story the best. Alot of great games don't offer that much in terms of gameplay that hasn't been done a million times before, but because the scenario is involving, the characters interesting and the integration with the gameplay is good, the game ends up good.

A good example is Final Fantasy. I was playing Final Fantasy X and I kept saying to myself "There's absolutely no game in there". You move around from point a to point b, fighting legions upon legions of monsters you've already seen a million times in a million different games, and you fight them in a combat system that was already obsolete 10 years ago. Then what gives? Why do people come back to these games? (Why will I buy Final Fantasy X-2 as soon as it hits the Greatest Hits bin?)

The story is excellent, the character design is unbelievable, the plot twist are awesome and yes the graphics border on the impossible. Three of those are scenario-based, one is technical. None relates to gameplay.

I know that in general you're far better to start up with a game idea, but sometimes if you have a great story to tell and can find a gameplay that wouldn't feel overly slapped over, I say go for it.

Great tips overall. I never listen to the third one though, which explains why I start up alot more projects than I ever finish ;-) But I do manage to finish a couple once in a while!

#7 Ah, the "game designer as frustraded film maker" issue. There are numerous examples of games that are marred by countless cut scenes *cough* Metal Gear Solid *cough*. Sometimes these guys get a chance to make their dream come true, and they waste two hours of our lives with stuff like Wing Commander and Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. Bah, I say. I play a game to play a game. There are better mediums if all you're going to do is tell a story.

#8 Ahem, aren't you disproving your own point? The Wing Commander and Final Fantasy movies were respectively atrocious and not very good. However when these people used games as the medium to tell their stories it worked. Games can be as effective (or more effective) a medium to tell a story if you know what you're doing. And obviously people like Chris Roberts were better at telling a story through a game than through a movie.

#9 If I thought Wing Commander or Final Fantasy were good games, yes. You're right, those guys weren't capable of making a good movie, but that doesn't mean their games are made better by including their lame stories.

#10 For me, the best filter is: Can I make a fun prototype in a reasonable amount of time?

#11 For me the best filter is:

At the end of the day - is there a market for this product, or will it just be a passion project (or something that only appeals to a niche market).

It all comes down to bottom line dollars in the end. Will it sell? Will OTHER people want to play this besides me?

#12 @Kurtis

I couldn't agree more

@Eric

I couldn't disagree more. No really I guess it depends why you're making a game. During the day I work for a multimedia company. We make entertainment software that sells and is also very boring (to me). The day job's to make money.

When I get home, fire up VC6 and get into my indie "job", I don't want to hear commercial arguments about what sells, what are the current market trends or how I could turn my idea into another soulless gaming incarnation of some movie or book franchise. I want to make a game that I will find fun to play and fun to develop. Weither it sells a million or a thousand or ten copies doesn't much matter. I still receive e-mails about games I made 8-10 years ago during my shareware years. Those games never brought in the big bucks, but I loved making them, and I love hearing about people who enjoyed them. That's what it's about for me.

If you want to hit "the big time" then yeah, worry about those things, but if you make games for the love of making games then trust your judgement and enjoy yourselves. Remember, odds are your game won't make you rich, very few games do. You're at a much greater chance of being emotionally drained and disappointed if your only goal is the bottom dollar, than you are if your goal is to make a great game.

Just my two cents.