By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
LGF said:
Slimebeast said:
I wish more gamers were aware of these things, aware of the structure of games. It would increase our expectations on game makers to develop more sophisticated games I believe.

This chart in the OP, these dimensions overlap a lot don't they? Meaning that one game can be sorted under several different categories or dimensions.

Or is it even so that every game in existance include all of the dimensions A to E?

The dimensions should all be crossed to classify a given game. And since a game is a complex product, it may have aspects of one or multiple categories in each dimension (please check the Pokemon classification I've given to DonFerrari).

Does it make sense to you? Or do you have a different perspective?

Well it should be that practically every game on the planet has all of the dimensions A to E, shouldn't it?

Nearly every, if not every, game should be able to be defined in those 5 attributes (what you call dimensions):

controls
environment
structure
objective
content

And your Pokemon example did this, didn't it?

I'm not objecting to anything, I'm just trying to get a clear picture of your taxonomy method.

Did you come up with any of those 5 categories (dimensions) and 12 sub-dimensions by yourself at all or is it taken from some existing universal method to define game structure?