 |
|
|
| |
The Value of Game Ideas
by David Rosen on 10/27/09 03:21:00 am
 
|
|
| |
|
Posted 10/27/09 03:21:00 am
|
| |
When I talk to aspiring game designers, I often notice some strange behavior. They're evasive about their ideas, almost coy, as if they've stumbled across a secret gold mine. They stamp obtrusive watermarks all over their concept drawings, and ask me to sign NDAs. Otherwise, they believe, someone would certainly steal their idea and unfairly profit from it. They usually want to be the 'idea man' for a team, and find some artists and programmers willing to implement their ideas for a percentage of the profits.The only explanation for this behavior is the belief that game ideas are extremely valuable in the game industry. This may be true in a limited sense, but nobody is going to steal your idea (or do all the work to implement it) -- they have their own ideas! Most game developers started off as gamers who dreamed of new games that nobody had made yet. They are all full of their own ideas, and would rather implement those than try and steal someone else's. Personally, I have lists of thousands of eclectic game ideas -- far more than I could implement in my lifetime. I will think of a few more right now, with pixel art illustrations by Aubrey.
TELEPORTATION ERROR 354
By 2036, teleporters were starting to enter the mainstream after a powerful marketing effort by Transeo. Matthew Cooper was heading to work one morning, as he did every morning. When he entered his office address and pressed the 'teleport' button, an alarm went off. He tried to open the door, but the screen kept flashing 'TELEPORTATION ERROR 354'. He was trapped in the booth until two company representatives pried open the door and carried him roughly into a van. The teleporter had created a copy of him on the other side, but failed to disintegrate him on this side. The technicians now were taking him away to be disintegrated, since this error would be very bad PR! He managed to get a message out to his other self, and they had to work together to save his life, and expose this murderous policy!
Hasker Boundville - Werewolf Detective
In 1888, Hasker was a constable in the police force, investigating a series of grisly prostitute murders. On a bright, moonlit night, he followed a suspect downtown, and watched him enter a secluded brothel. Soon after, unearthly screams cut through the night. Hasker blew his whistle and threw open the door. He stood frozen by the sight within. A salivating monster looked up from a fresh corpse, and bounded for the door -- bowling the constable over in the process! As Hasker picked himself up, he noticed that he had sustained a large scratch across his arm. Over the next few weeks, he started noticing changes in his body... changes he had to learn to control. He struggled to use his new form to catch killers, and not commit murder himself!
The Mystic Healers of the Jade Cross
You are a new initiate of the Jade Cross, a group dedicated to treating the grievous wounds inflicted on adventurers by vicious monsters and evil wizards. You can choose from one of three disciplines: the Bonesaws are masters of physical surgery, the Kneelers trade favors with the Gods to bestow holy reparations, and the Weavers use arcane magic to knit flesh from the inside out. As usual, there's a dire threat facing the Land, and as usual, it's up to you to heal broken adventurers until they can finally defeat it! They will get all the credit, but you know you are the true heroes.
Turning Ideas Into GamesThe quality of a game is 10% idea, and 90% execution. Let's look at two major games that are both about a time-traveler with a magical sword: Daikatana, and The Legend of Zelda. One of these games was a career-shattering flop, and the other spawned one of the most successful game franchises in history. The game idea and theme are really just spice for the core mechanics. Okami is an excellent game with a totally different idea: the player is the sun goddess Amaterasu incarnated as a wolf, restoring color to the world. However, at its core, it's almost the same game as The Legend of Zelda.If you want to turn your ideas into games, you need to prove that you can execute them well! You have to learn at least basic programming and artistic skills, and keep making games until they're good. Once others see that you're serious about making games, and have useful skills, they will join your team. Then, finally, you can do justice to your ideas!
Follow us here!
    
|
| |
|
|
I actually find your first idea really interesting, with the teleportation. Having two of you would make for some great gameplay and puzzles. You should get to work on that!
The 3 "ideas" are fairly generic stories, and nothing stood out.
I certainly wouldn't consider them ideas for a game (where's the design?).
Given the subject of the article,
why is the writer keeping his best ideas hidden in a secret gold mine?
Most games win on execution (Serious Sam),
some on ideas (Diner Dash),
some on both (Portal).
I find the trick with new ideas is to distinguish between the obvious,
and the truly new.
Example 1: Any ideas you have for the next GTA are obvious.
i.e. I can go into all buildings. and work a 9 to 5 job at an office I hate. Eventually, I go postal.
i.e. I can build more meaningful relationships with my friends and family. I turn on them.
i.e. GTA Earth - GTA lets you travel to other parts of the world using info from Google Maps
These are not new ideas. They are obvious extensions of what already exist.
Example 2: Any new guns you have for a first person shooter are obvious.
i.e. A gun that fires ropes into people so you can pull them to you and Scorpion uppercut
i.e. A gun that puts magnets on people so they get stuck to each other and nearby walls
We've reached a point where they can be programmatically generated (Borderlands),
Having a new gun idea is like having a new terrain idea.
- - -
Truly New Ideas (off the top of my head)
Dance Dance Revolution
Diner Dash
Restaurant City
Wii Sports
Doom
The Sims
Original Mario
Tetris
Mirror's Edge
Braid
Tomb Raider
WarioWare
Robotron
Scribblenauts
Portal
Alone in the Dark
Gran Turismo
Everyday Shooter
... many, many more
- - -
"The quality of a game is 10% idea, and 90% execution"
It depends on how you define quality.
I've played many polished games that bring nothing new to the table.
They're obviously "quality" games, and a lot of effort has been put into them,
but they get boring quickly.
i.e. How many times can I play a better variation of Tomb Raider?
While the idea may only take 10% of the effort (if that),
it makes or breaks the remaining 90%.
The 10% idea is more important than the 90% execution.
It seems unfair, but I believe it's true.
Like the author, I'm keeping my best ideas protected.
I do think its more than 10%, and Jim makes a valid point too. Polish is nice, but if you are playing something that's been done before, it doesn't matter how polished it is, it's just boring.
Also; do you consider those short stories 'Game ideas'? They seem like little stories to me, which could possible be the integration/justification for your real game ideas: gameplay mechanics. Maybe that's just me.
5 cents is overvaluing. A game idea without the team that can build it is worth nothing. Zip. Nada. If you think you have to protect your ideas, you are neither as creative nor as brilliant as you think you are.
Best,
Michael.
My advice for any aspirant game designer is: go independent, very independent. If you trust that much on that idea, do it. Coding is not that hard, make some flowcharts, coment out your script, and start searching for the native functions you need, and don't stop. About telling your ideas, don't, it won't make any difference anyway, if you wanna tell somebody, tell the code.
When designers let go of the concept that their untested ideas are unique--or more valuable than those of their team--they take an important step forward in their professional career. It requires them to open up new avenues of analysis and comprehension, which strengthens their design sense. This prepares them for the day they must come up with something original, in an unexpected context, with no time for contemplation, and no prior art to fall back on.
However, I know you were rightly pointing out that many aspiring game designers (very early in their aspirations, shall we say) tend to confuse plots for game ideas. I've encountered this problem myself on more than one occasion. They passionately relate the premise for their game and when you ask them, "but what sort of game will it be?" They tend to respond, "Oh, a puzzler or adventure game," almost as an afterthought.
I hope that as education in game design continues to improve, we will see less and less of this.
observation #1 - Game companies have employees who's entire job is to spend 8+hrs a day figuring out how marketable and profitable games, game concepts, game UX, etc. are likely to be. You might consider as an outsider to the industry that there is industry common knowledge and industry insider information that you dont have when you decided your game was going to outsell the bible.
suggestion #1 - Try joining the team before trying to crank one out of the park. You will learn alot by being a part of a game dev or design team that will help you perfect your pet project. You may also make contacts and put yourself in a better situation to get the game developed and be able to play an active role in its iterative design if you are already a part of the team / studio that develops it.
observation #2 - Without taking for granted the necessity of groundbreaking game concepts and designs to keep the wheels of the game industry turning, I think the insider gem worth considering in the article above is how difficult it is to get great implementation of your great ideas. The real world, with its finite network bandwidth, astounding range of hardware support requirements, limits of dev and art technologies and tools, finite resources [time, money, bodies, skill sets] ensures that the biggest challenge of making a game is actually making the game.
suggestion #2 - being cognizant of the resource investment required to bring your game to market can help you make good design decisions that will help sell your game. Game companies love to make games, but they HAVE to make money. If you can deliver a great game experience while managing your feature sets and assets down you will be able to demonstrate a good ROI (return on investment) to prospective developers and have a better chance selling your game.
Thx and GL,
Richard
Certainly, there is a valid "proof is in the pudding" argument, but all ideas are invaluable -- no matter how rough or undeveloped they are -- and are worthy of secrecy.
In a perfect world, people could share ideas freely, and the originator would be given credit, but it never works out that way. This has little to do with being the "idea guy," and much to do with becoming part of a collaborative process.
Who would want to give away an idea they've developed for years for only a "thanks?"
No, an idea is worth much more than that.
"A game idea without the team that can build it is worth nothing.
Zip. Nada. If you think you have to protect your ideas,
you are neither as creative nor as brilliant as you think you are."
Given the hostility,
I'm guessing you're a programmer.
I'm a programmer as well (BSc in Computer Science),
although my heart is not dead.
I completely agree that an idea needs to be feasible
(so it can be implemented by a team).
Additionally, if I follow your logic, if a person has an idea they want to protect (me for instance)
they're automatically a raving egomaniac.
Your world is a dark, cold place full of scary, awful people.
The assumption here is that an idea is hard to implement. Not all ideas are.
Cases in point (already listed): Tetris, Dance Dance Revolution, Diner Dash, WarioWare
Other Examples: Lumines, I wish I were the Moon, I Wanna Be The Guy, Papaton, Roco Loco
I believe all of them were made with small teams,
and some of them were made by a single person.
With all the insane tools now available,
implementation is becoming less of a hurdle
(at least for smaller games).
In other words, if you have a truly new idea
you might be able to gather the team to build it,
or simply do it yourself.
The iPhone has plenty of examples.
Until now, I just assumed everyone had an idea worth protecting.
It makes me sad to learn otherwise.
Sharing: "I have a game where you start out within a chamber and are run through a series of tests, under the guidance of a friendly robot voice. As you progress through the game, tests begin to get more difficult, to the point where they start becoming quite deadly. As this happens, the robot reveals her true nature, wanting to murder the player. You end up escaping these tests and running through the insides of the facility they took place in, until you eventually find the robot and kill her"
Is a bit different to sharing: "I have a game where you shoot portals".
One is worth very little on its own, because it really could be applied to anything, in a variety of ways which are terrible, with gameplay mechanics that simply aren't fun. In this case, yeah, you're going to need a hell of a lot of good work to try and turn that into a game worth playing. In the latter case, if you have someone who can implement said portals, and do it well (see: Narbacular Drop, which is exactly where this all started), then your ideas are definitely worth safeguarding.
Even with that said, however, giving two people the idea of "you can shoot portals" will give you completely different results, and there's no evidence that the same game idea developed by different people is going to be as successful as the other. What you need to be careful of is having the idea of "you can shoot portals", but not having the vision of creating something that demonstrates that well, when someone else can do it better (see: shooting portals in Deathmatch, which isn't fun at all, versus Portal itself). That's where things go wrong with sharing ideas. But even in that case, execution still wins in the end, because you're "only an idea" until you've released.
I once submitted an idea and got accused of abusing an account with the game company, I don't think I even had one with them, it was sent with noreply@-. If I wanted their money I wouldn't have said anything and would have hid under the cover of their hyperinflated ego that clouded their fragile virtual economy..
Ya gotta take it all with a grain of salt..it's not like I said GAME IDEA: 10 ways to pimp slap a gold farmer.
My take is that you can have a good idea (10%), but it takes a good game design document to truly flesh it out properly (90%). The implementation is another story, something like game doc (10%) versus final game (90%) even though "final game" is almost a preposterously broad and vague term.
@Alexander (next post) : I included iterations in the use of the term "fleshing out"... but yeah I agree with you though.
Nice replies though. Some really good stuff has been said.
I know that you've covered this in your comments anyway, saying that the document is only 10% of the implementation (therefore saying that the idea is then 1% of a finished product?), but some games simply go idea -> game, and are successful, through heavy iteration.