|
A phrase I have heard a couple of times, I always smile when I do. My usual response is: "Of course I am, that's why you hired me... to get close to things and to evaluate them".
So how do you get "too close"?
I think that it's used as an excuse to attempt to dismiss an opinion when there isn't a good counter to the argument. As a Producer, and usually put into the position to evaluate products, I am required to know it inside and out. As a matter of fact, I have been chastised a few times for NOT being close enough to a product.
When I was at SEGA even as an Associate Producer I was given the veto power on products. I was expected to play the game and give my intelligent feedback. If I had not gotten "too close" to GunStar Heroes, the product would not have been picked up by SEGA and it wouldn't have won Game of the Year and who knows what would have happened to the developer Treasure.
But how do you get close to it? Obviously the simple answer is to just play it. But I think you also have to play games LIKE the one you're evaling. What does this game bring to the table that changes the course of the genre, even if only slightly.
Someone once said, that you have to give the consumer something that is vastly superior to what they are already using to get them to switch. Maybe one of my readers can suggest who said that so I can give him credit where its due. The comment is very true in games.
Products to me must "move the circle". Let me explain what I mean by that. Let's say that Tomb Raider is the best third person title selling. Make that a point on a piece of paper, and then make a circle around that point with it being in the center.
All games in that genre fit within that circle. If your game is too close to the center, it's a clone, if it's FAR outside of the circle then you're asking the consumer to learn too much.
What you want to hit is the line of that circle. So that some parts of your game are known, but some parts are new and innovative.
So get close to your games and lets see where they hit in the circle. Don't go for a clone, hit the LINE!
Your comments?
Mac
[Read more of my blog posts at: http://aboutmakinggames.blogspot.com/]
|
The game upon release was unfinished and had serious issues. The AI was broken out the gate, the unit build times were horribly designed (like 20-40+ minutes to build an experimental or longer). Chris taylor said himself "We fell back to tanks and artillery", even though he didn't want to. He knew he was making mediocre game when those kinds of things happen.
A lot of good engineering was done on Supreme commander no doubt, but it feels way to "developer/programmer centric", in that they really needed some outside feedback from someone who has good judgement.
I've come to understand over the years there are certain people who simply have superior judgement in terms of game design compared to all others, they can take any game and tell you what it needs and what's wrong with it.
People tend to confuse commercial success with good design judgement - the two have nothing in common. Certain games that are successfull can be successful for a myriad of reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of the game, we see this all the time in MOVIE GAMES, most gamers know that movie games suck but they sell a lot on the strength of the brand alone, on the graphcis, or on the theme... there's a severe danger there which will mediocritize your ability to critically judge a game.
I also think people can feel too close to a game when they are no longer sure if the game is fun. I think this is like burn out. In the beginning, everything is new again, fresh and exciting. But overtime, the essential elements of a game can become stale so the developer starts to wonder, "Was I kidding myself? Is this fun? Maybe not..." That's when they are too close. Or on the opposite side, a developer invests so much into the game that it can't possibly not be compelling for players and every complaint by players is met with, "They don't know what they are talking about. I worked hard to make it perfect and it is." That's also being too close.
I'm interested in learning more about your circle evaluation tool in more depth. Another blog post?