Roronaa_chan said:
Twilord said:
Roronaa_chan said:
What is this "quality" you speak of? |
Polish, smoothness of gameplay, attention to detail, attentive manipulation of the player's psychology including the different trance states games can induce, ergonomic effeciency, reliability of mechanics to create fairness, responsiveness, respectful content quantity. There is a ton of other generic stuff like that which you can choose to learn about if you set your class to game designer and spend your gold on the right books and educational documents.
|
..and that isn't enough. That's a scientific or pragmatic way of looking at it. It's more "competence" than "quality". Not a great example but it's like thinking that designing a bridge that won't fall is enough even though it looks like a blight on the landscape. Or "inventing" a nutritious meal that also looks great but tastes like nothing. Etc. I hate the expression of calling something soulless but what you just described pretty much is the closest thing i'd apply the term to.
|
So 'cute' art styles are a blight on the game? - I use the mechanical definitions but 'manipulating player psychology' is effectively a large part of being 'charming/intense/emotive'. I've done experiments using some hypnosis research I've done and applying the related techniques to creative writing, which is usually quite well recieved as such.
Not saying its all done intentionally, its like 'shading an object to make it appear 3D' - you can do it badly, but once you can do it well you can do it 'convey' things.
