Discover Games

hiroshimishima:

syntheticsymphony:

A game being short does not equal it being less valuable.

I’ve seen people use this line of reasoning before and there a problem with it. This is like saying a plate with a small steak, sprig of parsley, and some colourful drizzle is somehow worth more money than a combo meal at Carls Jr (which isn’t an inexpensive place, either).

As far as I am concerned, and doubtless others, thereis a clear difference in value between a game that lasts days and a game that lasts hours. It’s a simple enough concept. What costs more, a 5 piece chicken nugget or a 20 piece?

I will say that depending on the game, replay value, and other factors that indeed $20 for a shortish product is not unreasonable. However, this is not going to be true for all games. Also, somewhat related to the bit I’m about to quote below, most of the short games I’m talking about aren’t AAA nor do they have the same production costs.

Read More

I think you’ve misunderstood the original sentence up there. He didn’t say “short games are MORE valuable than long ones” or even that short games were better. He just said that a game being shorter doesn’t necessarily lower its value, and I agree. I put probably 4 or 5 hours into Backbreaker 2: Vengeance, a somewhat bland iOS game, but that game was infinitely less valuable than Proteus, which took a half-hour to play the first time, or Thirty Flights of Loving, which took only 15 minutes. A short game can be as valuable or more valuable than a long one. And in the same vein, a cheap or free game can be more valuable than an expensive one.

(Source: manchestergamemaker)

100rings:

I wish my dreams were Proteus.

gothikhouse:

I don’t think I’m smart enough to make a videogame. I’ve got confidence to say I could at least write a story line. But making a game is… Well… Maybe I’ll give it a shot and later I’ll tell you what it feels like for someone like me.

I appreciate the “Do it yourself” spirit! But on the other hand… “Everyone is a genius, but judge a fish over it’s capacity to climb a tree and it’ll spend it’s life feeling like an idiot” or something like that :)

I used to feel that way too, until I read Anna Anthropy’s book, Rise of the Videogame Zinesters. In it, she talks about all the new and easy tools people now have at their disposal for making games, and how EVERYONE can do it.

I realized after reading it that my “I’m too much of an idiot” excuse was just a cop-out. Don’t get me wrong: I am an idiot. I can’t draw, I can’t write a single line of code, and I’m frankly just not that good with technology. These all seemed like good reasons not to make a game (and some days they still do), but Anna taught me that it’s the act of creation that matters, not the technical savvy or even the quality of the final product.

If you want to make a game, that’s reason enough to do it. If you’ve got an idea that would best be expressed or explored in a game, you owe it to yourself (if not the medium) to try to make that happen. And the tools really are there. I made a functional game in Stencyl in a month, with no coding necessary. Twine is even easier. If you managed to type that response in Tumblr, you can make a game in Twine (no exaggeration). Both of those tools are free, and there are many more besides. You truly can make a game. Whether you want to or not is a personal decision, obviously, but if decide you do, there’s not nearly as much standing in your way as you might think.

(Source: reprobateknave)

reprobateknave:

Can an independent game developer please make a game that allows you to play as a normal human girl in a normal human life so that men can see what it’s like to be a girl in the modern age?

You should do it! I’m not being dismissive or facetious; I mean it. Whenever someone is like “Why doesn’t a game like ______ exist,” that is an invitation from the universe to make it yourself. No one is more qualified than you to make a game you want to see exist.

holocity:

Sources confirm that with the release of the Xbox One, Doritos and Mountain Dew will contain specially crafted nanomachines.

These nanomachines will measure your “biomedical gamer level” and transmit that data to your Xbox One. Any changes detected by them will adjust your “Dewrito Gaming Experience *TM*” and will adjust the games accordingly.

When confronted about the fact that the Xbox One will not run without constant input from these nanomachines, a Microsoft official reportedly told gamers to “Either eat Dewritos or eat shit” before diving off stage into a pool of Mountain Dew, Doritos, and sweet sponsorship cash.

caramelzappa:

discovergames replied to your post: Ok who told you I was talking about Killer7 just now?

I just finished it for the first time the other day.

Oh yeah? What’d you think? (Besides weird.)

I’m gathering my thoughts. Ultimately I liked it. The light puzzle/adventure gameplay was enjoyable, and the shooting actually felt really good when it worked properly. It’s unique and bold and fun, so at the end of the day it’s a winner.

But there are definitely a lot of things that bothered me about it. Absolutely nothing is adequately explained: not the story, the controls, the characters’ abilities, the upgrade mechanics, nothing. A new enemy will show up, and you’ve got 3.2 seconds to divine from the ether its particular weakness and which character can best exploit it, before they take off almost half your health. I’m not looking for a hand to hold, but you’ve got to give players at least something to go on.

There’s more, of course, and I’ll do my review later, but those are my thoughts right now. Basically good, with a few annoying or frustrating things.