WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO INCREASE THE LEGACY OF YOUR GAME DESIGN?

author=Marrend
Since we're only supposed to respond to the thread title, not the first post (that's a weird concept), I assume that you mean leaving a legacy of really cool games that people will point to say, "This is how it's done."

Sure, I've got some games under my belt, but none of them are shown as examples of what to do. I may have a few examples of what not to do, though! Which kinda counts?

I don't get how you will get that kind of impression. The thread title IS the first post. The first post is the thread title.

Oh and I don't mean to go all zen but nothing counts and everything counts.

This isn't a topic where there is a right or wrong. This is a topic where there is simply answers.

author=eplipswich
I must tell you, snodgrass, you seriously must learn how to get to the point sometimes...not random blattering of your own thoughts...Basically, I cannot see the conclusion of what point you are trying to make in the first place...

Maybe you should seriously speak to people outside more often...If you don't believe me that a lot of people here don't understand you, try talking like this in real life and see if people actually understand you...It's like you're from a different world altogether...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In any case, like others mention, make a game really, really good, original, creative and unique from others. That's how to make a game stand out. Marketing does play some role as well but the former is the most important.

P.S. No offence, but I would like to see you make a game with a story of a language of words. I'll be interested in such a game, really.

Have you actually talked to people outside?

Albeit yes, I live a life of pseudo-hikikomori (though I'm not Japanese) and up until recently where I broke that streak of being indoors - I was a full on hikikomori. It doesn't change basic human attitude though whether I'm inside or outside. Politicans still campaign. Athiests still worry about religion brainwashing. People are still failing to convince many people to go vegan. Hilariously even the WWE managed to make a heel out of a vegan.

Unless you're a public speaker (who deals with non-controversial topics), 99% of the people don't understand each other once they actually talk.

That's why religion is a sensitive topic. That's why politics is a sensitive topic. You can even credit this as the key issue for why philosophy is dead as a college course. People don't want to talk about anything related to philosophy. You can go all psychological and people would accept that more than philosophy because it has weaker ties to their emotional bias.

Even for philosophical games, you can much faster "create" it and have fans improve upon it and drool upon it more than you can initiate a successful topic unless such topic is the vainest of philosophical magnitude (like if Aeris was a prostitute or not and even that is considered wtf by most people).

This very human irrationality mixed with the desire to make everything impersonal while reacting emotionally is why such stock statements like making a game really really really good, original, creative or unique to others don't sum up anything at all and don't answer the thread. I wasn't just insulting the stock obvious, I also didn't want to "randomly blabber" on with this additional layer that's why I used such things as Twilight.

A perfect product who's legacy is so ingrained that even for fans of the product, it no longer feels like an insult to hear insults about that movie/book because it has moved and lived past irrationality. It is a mainstream concept that can go both ways no different from the stuff like Madonna, Lady Gaga, Disney girls, etc. It is both mainstream polarizing and mainstream politically correct to have any emotion towards it.

Now if you want to go and head further to that branch, you can but that branch is only partially relevant to bringing up the actual point of the thread which is a topic about game design.

If this is still not obvious to you, let me give you a couple of clearer but certainly off-topic points.

Your premise is that I'm randomly blabbering and doesn't get to my point.

If this were a game you would say the direction of the game goes nowhere and therefore it is of lower quality.

If this were stock advises, you could simply say the game design needs more KISS.

But if you remove the emotional biases and take the tinted glasses off, factually you are the one who randomly blabbers.

Your point was you cannot see the conclusion. That should have been a period.

To extend that without randomly blabbering you have to then show your desire for whether you lean towards wanting to understand something or you were simply not interested and just wanted to give your comment.

Even after that, there's no guarantee that you can't randomly blabber. Take the guy who came before you who said he won't reply until I spoke English but felt like he still needed to ask what the topic was all about. Take the guy who came before you who said they only addressed the topic title and even included that statement in the first sentence but still felt like they had to write the exact same sentence as a reply, later down the thread.

...but you didn't do that did you? Instead when faced with confusion, you emotionally blabbered on about an irrelevant idea like talking to more people outside. You then followed this by trying to answer the question with stock answers even though you already admitted that you didn't get any conclusion.

If this were a more straight forward test, you'd basically be the guy who doesn't know 1+1 but felt like writing down 3 anyway.

If this were a game it would even be more complex. It would be the equivalent of a great (but mind you not mainstreamly praised) game being creative, maybe original but because maybe it's created on a dated engine like Rpg Maker games, your reply would be the equivalent of saying you did not understand why someone would make SNES era graphics type of game in this day and age and then further blabbering on that the game maker must not have played with people outside.

Anyways, in case you go on an emotional rant and further make some irrational comeback thinking I merely said this to insult you (or maybe to confuse you/whichever), just take a step back and realize that this reply is notable to the thread. It's not just me broking down your reply for personal sake, I'm highlighting why this thread is made. People are irrational. Many times they don't realize it. Many times they don't realize the irrational gap they take for conclusions. You don't realize how inanely off-topic and off-base your idea of talking to people outside is but you react that way simply because it matches your initial emotion and you have to fill that gap with rationality. Well guess what? In game design, there's not always room for that especially with game engines that can't compete with the capacity of better coders and more expensive staff. That's why legacy is so important.

Even something as mundane as the Marvel Brothel creator stating he actually visited an actual brothel owner is a major example of upping one's legacy and yet if you drill this down to stock advises, you get the less helpful advise of "do your research" (and even the comment came from such a thread titled that way)

...and yet whether the game creator consciously recognized this, the two answers are inherently different. Do your research as an advise, trains people to just do their research.

Visiting a brothel to make a game based on a brothel, while holding the same overall point, creates a different legacy and a different implication as to how to up that legacy. Unintentionally or intentionally, the game creator by stating such an advise channeled something closer to the advise most directors give to newbies which is to find a bottleneck. That is a set that is still expensive but cheaper to produce scenes on. Example, a haunted house where you can make the entire film on one place and still create layers of depth as shown by the original Saw movie (obviously not the sequels).

As you can see this was always problematic because games have cheaper ways to..."expand areas". A mountain tile and a plains tile could make one entire epic movie where as that's not possible in a live action film without adding huge costs.

By stating a more specific advise, the creator creates a revolutionary reverse-bottlenecking advise. That is instead of visiting areas just to do one's research, one can visit an area to do a research but more tailored to that area.

Example, room escape games are based on the concept that everything takes place in one house and it has promoted many unique ideas. Except for the fact that many of those ideas are still unexplored by many more general rpg games and thus many games are limited to cheap game designs such as Inns not being Inns or only Bars having lots of npcs. I'm not saying you should merge that but if you observe the design of these other games, how come they can create more depth in an isolation setting compared to more general rpgs who have the conveniences of npcs. That's just one example and it's still an example that's flawed. You can still create a stock advise out of that but the specific answers are always more unintentionally revolutionary and sometimes actually revolve around requiring contemplation and with more contemplation, such obvious reactionary excuses as talking to more people outside would not even get past the submit button at all or at the very least be edited out in all forms.

Edit: Unfortunately I don't know enough about rpg maker to make a game yet. I'm not even sure this is the preferred engine. The other unfortunate thing is I saw one of the best games based on language in excrutio eternum and I'm not sure I can make a game based on language that tops that design. It's a Neverwinter Night mod where one sub-plot was you had to collect the words of a mute poet and then fill it with the words of her poetry. Design-wise, it's just a more uniquely done twist on fetch quests (the words were actual items) and I'm not that big of a fan of the conclusion but again, design-wise, it's just hard to top especially in terms of making such an idea stand out. It's truly one of those ideas that wouldn't work as well if the engine wasn't 3d or the engine was too 3d...or at least the emotion of impressiveness would be vastly dampered.

There you go again, eplipswich. You don't get it, do you?

Seriously, try telling someone they don't get it. That's sure to make them get it.

Actually here let me help you: this thread and my reply to you are both written in the same style.

The point is in the first sentence:

Have you actually talked to people outside?

No different from:

What would you do to increase the legacy of your game design?

I did get to the point. You just make the obvious sloppy assumption that I didn't because it's easy to see any wall of text as wall of text. It's another common irrationality. Wall of text must mean someone is not getting to the point. Why? Because it's long.

P.S. You can't claim someone is veering off topic when you claim you can't understand the thread especially when that someone actually made the thread.

P.S. #2: No offence or anything. Just please get less emotional and try actually reading. You don't even have to read the whole thing. My style is one where you can get the point from the first sentence or you can continue unwrapping the layers until the first sentence makes sense. The heavy downside of course is that people uninterested can fake it by claiming I'm bringing up an entirely different topic by honing in on key words and hiding behind the fact that a reply is lengthy.

author=papasan96
That's it, I give up. As far as I can make out I didn't answer the OP correctly, and my brain has started to protest at trying to read your posts. Sorry. I won't reply to any more of your threads until I can see an improvement in coherency.

Last thing...it doesn't help using foreign language terms that most readers probably won't be familiar with, especially when they are terms particular to the culture they came from. You are not a hikkikomori (recluse) because you are not Japanese nor live in Japan, and are not therefore part of the culture that has created the hikkikomori phenomenon. Ditto honne and tatemae (true feelings and public facade). I agree that sometimes foreign words can give a far closer meaning to what you want to say than any words in your native language. But I would never use these words with other English speakers without coming across as pretentious.

Good luck on the site and if you ever make your own game.

Believe me my usage of them can come off pretentious to fellow Hikikomoris too. As far as the English ones I spoken to. It doesn't bother me.

The key is to understand those words and see how accurate they are to your own setting. Also anyone can come off as pretentious, the true question is whether a person is actually being pretentious or whether it's the opposite party being pretentious.

In this case, I know I'm not being pretentious because I don't idolize those terms nor do I simply look at it like a blanket system. As I said to someone who said you have to be a Japanese to be a hikikomori, "No, even among the Japanese it is a mystery that's why the media can demonize and sensationalize the issue. That's like saying a middle class American who lives in the suburbs knows the culture of an African American guy living in the ghetto and therefore any wannabe white thug can claim to be from the streets just cause they are American but any non-American who lives in their own hell hole can't relate to them. It's all in the culture not in the nationality."

I do know that someone is being pretentious though when they are too lazy to look up the dictionary of a word and yet they are the ones who raise the issue of why I use such a term. It's like asking a question for the sake of asking a question or for the sake of looking to insult someone once they give the answer. I don't mean to say you did this consciously but like I said, pretentious is one of those concepts where given the right sets of situation, everyone can come off pretentious but it takes a specific attitude towards a specific situation to be truly pretentious.

To link this to game designs that up legacy, it's why again the specific little details matter. One of the most pretentious thing we humans do is to rely on memory especially nostalgia. When you do that, you rip away what made the design worked in favor of what impression that design left. It's way way worse when it comes to just naming the games even if you made them. You can intend a game to leave behind something but sometimes only looking at a tile or a piece of music in an area or a pattern do you realize what in fact it was you were truly trying to leave behind in those games and how your fans spotted something you didn't although they misjudged the actual depth of what you designed.