All I'm saying is that there is APLENTY material out there in games already out to make one heck of an awesome mash.
Ever wondered why some games were fun, but couldnt stand the effects of time or other game's release? Often, they would rely on a few features alone and build their marketing and gameplay around those too much.
For a quick example, Blacklight: Tango Down. I could point out the many (more like innumerable) flaws the game was riddled with, but I stand to my point and say the game relied too much on small aspects and gimmicks to sell. Arguably, it was an arcade title and wasnt meant to be polished all that much from the get go.
"Gamers" being what they are, the game is now more or less empty. Early flock of players having soon moved away to -maybe- better games. Why? Again, because the formula couldnt sustain itself.
I guess it's expectable but it makes me wonder on the recipe to making a great game
(Fun>Sales btw).
Could it be that great games comes not from one developer, but from many? That, to make a fun to play AND sustainable game, one should not create too much, but borrow from other games a bit more? To let go of the "artist" pride and go for the greater good?
I dont have a good example here, because (frankly) it hasnt been done really. All we've seen are devs who borrow the VERY SAME gimmicks that could only support another game for so little time.
I have a few ideas, but I'll hang unto them for a little while (thread pending).
What do you guys think?
Ever wondered why some games were fun, but couldnt stand the effects of time or other game's release? Often, they would rely on a few features alone and build their marketing and gameplay around those too much.
For a quick example, Blacklight: Tango Down. I could point out the many (more like innumerable) flaws the game was riddled with, but I stand to my point and say the game relied too much on small aspects and gimmicks to sell. Arguably, it was an arcade title and wasnt meant to be polished all that much from the get go.
"Gamers" being what they are, the game is now more or less empty. Early flock of players having soon moved away to -maybe- better games. Why? Again, because the formula couldnt sustain itself.
I guess it's expectable but it makes me wonder on the recipe to making a great game
(Fun>Sales btw).
Could it be that great games comes not from one developer, but from many? That, to make a fun to play AND sustainable game, one should not create too much, but borrow from other games a bit more? To let go of the "artist" pride and go for the greater good?
I dont have a good example here, because (frankly) it hasnt been done really. All we've seen are devs who borrow the VERY SAME gimmicks that could only support another game for so little time.
I have a few ideas, but I'll hang unto them for a little while (thread pending).
What do you guys think?