/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.5520667]

Now that gaming is old enough, it's time to define what good game design is. And I can think of no better corner of the internet to ask than this board.

What does good game design mean to you?

[Anonymous No.5520672]

>>5520667
eat shit

[Anonymous No.5520675]

>>5520667
Have sex

[Anonymous No.5520682]

>>5520667
Whether I win or lose I think "I want to play again"

[Anonymous No.5520901]

>>5520667
gay

[Anonymous No.5520906]

It's only entertainment, so whether I'm being entertained.

[Anonymous No.5520909]

>>5520667
pic unrelated

[Anonymous No.5520912]

>>5520667
Fuck off with this "good/bad" level design meme, it is not even a fucking deep or a complex topic, the only way to make a game actually enjoyable is to keep things fresh, add some good mechanics and there you go. It deppends of the kind of game, the pacing and the genre itself, as long as you don't add boring shit or try to hard to implement things that don't really work well together.

[Anonymous No.5520915]

>>5520912
Jesus christ this post is so cringy i just might kill myself now

[Anonymous No.5520935]

>>5520915
You won't do it. Coward.

[Anonymous No.5520936]

>>5520667
I've said it before and I'll say it again. In order for people to properly articulate "good" game design we need to first develop a theory and critical vocabulary around the "aesthetic" of gameplay, here defined by the intersection between controls, mechanics, level design, and other art assets (audiovisual, but also possibly tactile feedback).

Until we can flesh this out we are going to end up flailing because we lack any serious critical framework to ground our criticism in.

[Anonymous No.5520946]

>>5520912
Way to spend a whole post to say absolutely nothing. What is "boring"? What are "Good mechanics"? How do we know when things "don't really work well together"? I think we need more detail than essentially "add good game design and don't add bad game design!"

[Anonymous No.5520959]

>>5520936
It doesn't help that opiniond on what's fun vary wildly. I trust people genuinely enjoy Mario, but I find it very tedious and dull whereas some of my favorite games are disliked by a majority.

[Anonymous No.5520969]

The only responses you'll get here are 'the games I had as a kid are well designed even if they suck and anything made after my childhood is terrible'

[Anonymous No.5521010]

>>5520969
I like new games even more on average than old games even though there are still lots I love.

[Anonymous No.5521154]

I think it depends on what the goal of the game is. It's always going to have some level of subjectivity, but I generally consider a few things above others.

Pacing in regards to difficulty and repetition, how effectively the game accomplishes it's goal, novelty as it relates to the time the game was made, and individual level design as it relates to all of the previously mentioned. Replay value is nice, but not necessary to be a fantastic game imo.

[Anonymous No.5521496]

any game where you can go from system off to playing the game in a /very/ short period of time. spamming start should ALWAYS bring you straight to the title screen or game

[Anonymous No.5521563]

Have you played more than 100 different games?
Are you having fun with it?

If the answer is yes to both, there you go.

[Anonymous No.5521639]

>>5520959
well no shit that's why we have variety in videogames, so much that we need genres to help classify them. Some game systems and mechanics are incompatible with others so you need multiple games to explore them all.

[Anonymous No.5521642]

>>5520969
that's mostly Ocarina of Time fans.

[Anonymous No.5521682]

>>5520936
You might try and demolish your ceiling with your brow, but in the end most criticism (and specially game criticism) is completely unobjective and just based around "gut" judgement. Most critical concepts are just brought into play to validate and fortify that intuitive perception

[Anonymous No.5523642]

There's too much that goes into it to describe the whole topic in just a 4chan post. There's no one defining element of game desighn, especially sense diffrent games try to offer diffrent experiences for diffrent kinds of people. It'd be like saying "what makes a good story" or "what makes good art".

I'm not trying to say it's pointless to analyze games because of that, rather to be less broad. Analyze one game at a time or focus on one element at a time "What's good map desighn?", " What's good rng?", "How do you make story and gameplay not feel detached?", "How do you make players feel like their part of the world and their choices matter?" "What's the diffrence between challenging but fun and pure frustation?", "How do you capture an atmosphere?", "What makes a moment memorable"

But for me I guess my favorite games are the one's that follow "A game is a series of intresting decisions".

[Anonymous No.5523658]

This thread didn’t quite go according to plan, did it, OP?
My question to you is, what makes pic related such a great painting? It looks like a toddlers mess to me.
Furthermore, I’m bad at Mario games.

[Anonymous No.5523663]

>>5520667
Link's Awakening is the best Zelda.

[Anonymous No.5523848]

Good game design in principle follows along the lines up this graph somewhat imo.

[Anonymous No.5523850]

>>5523848
I might add that flow channel = fun

[Anonymous No.5523949]

gaming should be fun and rewarding

[Anonymous No.5523984]

>>5520667
You sound like an insufferable faggot. >>>/r/eddit

[Nicollet Avenue Kmart !0J4ewmjU/I No.5524356]

>>5523848
Only if you're a total gritlet who doesn't prefer losing.