On Fun: Flatout was…. Full Auto wasn’t.
Both games were derivative with smaller innovations in the “tried and true” racing genre.
Flatout introduce the concept of a dummy that you could “launch” from crashing. It was great! Physics made fun…
FUN:
Full Auto went the Twisted Metal route and added “reversible time” and a fully destructible world – sadly the game was boring. Physics made pointless.
Looks fun, but isn’t:
As I tweak my tech demo, I’m thinking of how my game can be FUN!
To me, what fun isn’t:
- Insane difficulty -> that’s how games in the 80s dealt with the lack of content
- Unintuitive / unresponsive controls – here’s looking at you Cooking Mama on the Wii.
- Overly responsive controls – here’s looking at you Gran Turismo. Fun you are not. Hardcore, yes.
What a fun game has:
- A slowly progressing level of difficulty and challenges – even the most hardcore can benefit from a system where the player is slowly introduced to new skills. Mario games do this well. Jet Set Radio Future did this well even with it’s hardcore control scheme.
- Positive feedback to puzzles/challenges successfully completed. In fact, there is a game entirely based on looking at happy people that feeds on this psychology theory. When players see happy faces they become happier as a result. I don’t need to prove this further – just play Peggle and be convinced.
- A relatable (or desirable) theme -> see the plethora of casual games with modern themes instead of “tranny cowboy goes mud wrestling for dollars to save his/her foster child.”
Add comment September 2nd, 2007