Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsLIVEWIRE'S PROFILE
Livewire
136
Close
I'm a hobby game maker. No real career aspirations for the gaming industry,
Search
Filter
All
User Statuses
What are you thinking about? (game development edition)
New Demo COMING
New Demo COMING
Looking Back: Legion Saga Series
author=Lordnikogreiko
If anybody is interested, i'm remaking Legion Saga 1 with rpgvxace
Few years ago I asked Kamau if i could do it for my fun purpose.
Never done it but now it's different.
I did change a little bit of text.
All credits goes for Kamau
I am VERY interested.
What's in a name?
You might be right, alterego. I'm having second thoughts on the name change: company of hearts suits the gameplay.
"Mature" games?
author=LockeZ
"Mature," like "old," is simply a relative term. It's not a binary state, it's a spectrum. On one end you have a sperm cell, and on the other end you have an omniscient deity who created the universe. Most of us are somewhere in between.
Alternately, to think of it in a different light, none of us will stop maturing until we die. So a game that is truly for fully matured audiences would only be appropriate for those on their deathbeds.
I think you've hit it on the head there, LockeZ. Which is why I want to add another dimension to the discussion: is "mature" a fair way to measure quality in games, as the term itself is so ambiguous?
"Mature" games?
author=Avee
I don't know many games that fit Livewire's description of "mature" games
Y'know, I honestly couldn't think of any either. To me, there seems to be more games that the industry is willing to call "definitely not mature".
Starter Pokemon Evoulutions
"Mature" games?
I look on a lot of internet forums and comments on gaming articles. The word "mature" often comes up when talking about different games. Problem is, I'm not sure what a lot of people mean when they say "mature".
For me, mature suggests a depth of understanding, an ability to look at the world beyond it's black and white representations and an ability to handle problems in calm, logical, manner.
That's not the message I'm getting from a lot of games meant to be "mature", where the term seems to be a synonym for "inappropriate for children". In my opinion, you're talking about different things, there. The "Fast and Furious" movies I would absolutely say are inappropriate for children, but the paper-thin plot, the instant gratification and sloppy writing of the films make it far from being mature in my eyes.
Which is why I want to take it to you guys- what really makes a game mature? Is it extreme content, or depth?
For me, mature suggests a depth of understanding, an ability to look at the world beyond it's black and white representations and an ability to handle problems in calm, logical, manner.
That's not the message I'm getting from a lot of games meant to be "mature", where the term seems to be a synonym for "inappropriate for children". In my opinion, you're talking about different things, there. The "Fast and Furious" movies I would absolutely say are inappropriate for children, but the paper-thin plot, the instant gratification and sloppy writing of the films make it far from being mature in my eyes.
Which is why I want to take it to you guys- what really makes a game mature? Is it extreme content, or depth?
Games we need to get over
author=King of Games
Using the term "get over" is a misappropriation. Really what you're talking about is hype. Time has codified an oeuvre of classics that transcend what they are and stand as more exemplar of successful or transitional periods in game design.
For example, FF1 may be seen as a dumb cliche game from our perspective, but it is culturally significant for basically creating the tropes/genre of what an RPG is. Chrono Trigger was/is hailed as a masterpiece because it took the RPG and exacerbated its forms into something that at its time had never been synthesized in such a way before.
FF7 took RPGs into the realm of 3D in an important way that mirrors what OoT did for the zelda series. (Although I still think FF6>FF7) To translate a successful 2d game (LttP, Mario) into OoT and Mario 64, and get it 'right' on the first try is a remarkable feat that deserves the celebration that those games received.
You're seeing time as something that pushes forward, and forces us to 'forget' old games, or to 'get over' them. In reality, it are these games that transcend time and came about due to very specific set of circumstances that should be considered as masterpieces.
Another example, tetris came out decades ago, but a modern generation can pick it up and easily get addicted, it's not specific to any one time or age set, talk about good game design!
You're right. "Get over" was just used for lack of a better word. What I was really talking about was the way that we will look at classic games, and expect the newer ones to basically be remakes with better graphics (case point; OOT and FF7). I'm not suggesting these are bad games at all. But we shouldn't grab the pitchforks when the series decides to try something new.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
