Almost Everything About Making A Game Discussion

[Vyoma 0]

There are quite a few reasons I am making this post here. One reason - being outrightly honest - is that I would be doing it

 

for the hosting days I get from Xisto.

 

Jokes aside, I think we have had quite a few threads that seek to know more about making a game. Here are few of the threads

 

which I have lurked in:

Help me create text based turn based game

How can I start on Game Programming

Newbie seeking make games

These and other similar threads have been the drive for me to put this post here on making of game. Now that I have put the motive for this post down, here are points that I would briefly discuss on.

Motive for game creation

Various categories where work is involved for creation of game

Few different options for venture

Motive for game creation

What could be the motive for a person, or a group of people to create a game? I see that this motive comes in two flavours. One, they are passionate about games, and would love to create one more. Another motive is for the financial gains - trust me, the gaming industry is a heavy paying industry if you strike the jackpot like the movie industry.

 

Out of these two motives there might me other, but I cannot think of any. Most of the time it is usually the mixture of these to motives that drives one or a group to create a game. I have seen a trend here at Xisto that many are actaully driven by the passion for games and not for the financial gains. I am though not surprised, because at one time I myself was in the same shoes. I remember marveling at the 256 coloured side scroller games published by SEGA, ID and Apogee software companies. All I did during those days on my PC was chrun our one game after another that not more than a handful of my friends would play - it is another thing that I was quite skillful in C/C++ and also using Allegro graphics library that it helped me through my graduation - but the main motive for me to learn technology was just the passion for games. I am passionate about games even to this date, but I think with age a bit of the other motive too has come into picture.

 

Now, why would we need to discuss the motives in a write-up on creation of games? I think that they are important perspective one needs to be aware of during the making of games. If it is just ones liking for games that is the reason for creating it, one need not worry about anything else. One need not worry about acceptability, marketability and such things.

 

But if there is even a bit of financial motive, then that would form an important parameter. It would decide on the technology used, the content created, and the way the game is published. The technology would need to be considered because if the target market does not have the technology, then they would not buy the game. If the culture of the target market is offended or finds the content of the game irksome, then not many copies of the game would be sold. Thus, before starting out on creation of any game, one should set ones motives pretty clear.

 

Various categories where work is involved for creation of game

There would be many things that one or a group of venturers would ignore in their excitement on starting out to create a game. As many of us have seen, we have a lot of threads asking what technology they need to learn to create a game. They put other things on their blindside, thinking that technology alone can create the game. Then there are others, that have just a very basic idea about the game, and ask on how they can do that. They overlook the fact that, the details that they are missing to mention itself become the characteristics of the game if they ever get to complete it.

 

So, what are the categories of work that one would need to concentrate on to create a game. I will not be detailing all the intricate categories, but broadly, I can say that there is technology and then there is content. How one actually puts it down (creation of design or proposal documents and such things) would go into a project management write up.

 

Technology is just the tool and it is not the game itself - one should remeber that. More than half of the game lies in the content, and technology only drives it. But the tool or the driving engine should never be faulty. Thus, depending on the motive, one has to choose the technology platform on which the game would be developed. For target of PC computers, C/C++ or Java engines would suffice. For a web based browser game, PHP/JSP/AJAX or any of the other phletora of technology could be used. Of there would be other firmware and such things. One should also look into the other targets of PS2 and XBox. Once you decided on the target, choosing of technology becomes easier. Then, one should start building the engine depending on the type of game that one requires. Or one may even go and buy some game engine off the shelf, and only focus on content.

 

The second, but the most important part of a game is its content. Gone are the days when the nifty programatics of a computer served as an entertainer - the blocky pixeled games were very primitive then. Now, people look for content in a game. Most of us Blizzard fans know of the mythical story woven for the Diablo series. The story of the Warcraft series, from the same series is much more intricate. The content is the key that makes or breaks the games of today. If one create a compelling enough content, more than one games can be spawned out of it. Now, again, the motive also plays a key role in the game. If one does it for passion alone, then the content would be only important if one is creating an adventure game or something on similar lines. But content does play an important role if one looks for some financial returns. The world on which the game is built needs to be more consistant and intricate (though not necessarily).

 

Few options for ventures

OK. This is a bit hard for me, because I myself am not established in the industry. But I can say that again there are few approaches.

Have a proposal, get funding from a company - well that is about it. I know there are some who have tried it and succeeded and many who failed. I am not the best source to describe how one would approach it.

Now, if you have the financial motive on a lower tone, and if you are starting out alone, you could use this approach. First of all, have a basic plan of the game or the world that you want to create and put it out on the internet. There should be people who could be interested in it, and you could start out as a open source groups.

Lastly...

One thing that I realize while writing this post is that I was safe by putting the word 'almost' in the title. There is quite a lot about making of the game, and may be we can discuss it more here. But I think, this write up does help in putting things in perspective for those who start out to create a game.

 

Reading through my post for the second time, I belive I am a bit biased towards the content part of the work, but that I belive is the case because of the experience I have had trying to create a compelling one over the past few years.

 

As I said earlier, I think we could discuss some more on the points I have indicated here, and some other things that I might have missed, so that, when some one comes knocking at the Xisto forums, we can lead them straight to this thread.

[tommydanger 0]

very good points Vyoma :)But I think game creation has changed over the last years.Just remember Pacman or Pitfall, if you look at the credits it barely says that 5 or more people worked on the game.It was alot easier to make games 10 years ago, the games where fairly easy (in terms of game development), they used 2D graphics,256 colors and thats it.All you need to know was how to code :)The coder could also provide the graphics for the game by themself, as the possibilities where restricted.Nowadays you got Pixelshader, Bumpmaps, Paralaxmaps, Enviromental Maps,.. it isn't that easy anymore.Just look at gamestudios nowadays, they got experts on allmost every aspects.Nowadays gamestudios barely have 10 or less employees.It was just a matter of time with the introduction of realtime 3D graphics.As the complexity raised, due to higher standart it wasn't possible to just go ahead an start developing a game, you had to write your ideas down, and provide a basis for your members.So the design document is a must have nowadays, to keep everyone on track.I know it for fact, cause I mapped for HL/2 and when I started I got lost really quick, I wasn't satisfied with the map, wether it was the brushwork or some slow downs as I reached the engines limit :/Now when I want to start a map again, I first lay out everthing to make sure, everythings smooth and write down the desired atmosphere, this helps a lot, when everything is in shape I fire up the editor and start mapping.Also the change from HL to HL2 was intense.To make a map for HL all you need was the level editor.To make a map for HL2 you need the level editor too, but also need to know how to model and how to integrate the model into the engine :/But this just confirms me that game developing is much more difficult these days than it was before.

[Vyoma 0]

tommydanger, you are quite right on everything you said. It was one of the reasons that I started this thread - to get the realization of how complex it is these days to start a game. I have seen a lot of people come over here at the forums and ask how to do it - which of course is too difficult these days as you said.It involves a lot more than coding. As I said in the first post, technology (which you worded as coding) is just a part of the gaming. What requires now is a lot more than that. That said, one may ask, is it not possible to create games like they used to in the last decades? Ofcourse it is possible, but it wont stand a chance against the phletora of games out there. The ones of the last decades were really gems in themselves - small and beautiful. But that is not the case in present times.Design - or in a bit of broader terms, content design itself is the key to the success of a game. And as you said, by the trends of the games of these days, people (target audience) just do not take any inferior detailed content in any game as passable. They just move on to next. Content is everything these days. And a lot of work goes into building these days, and as you correctly said, it takes more than one person to create a good game.So, is there any hope for a single person to create a game? Well, if the drive is only passion for gaming, then no one can really stop someone from making a game. But if there is even a bit of financial motive in it, what I find as a plausible solution is to get more people like yourself who are interested in creating a game. I doubt there is any drought for such kind of people due to the number of threads in the Game Programming section here at Xisto forums.Once you get a group of people going in for it, you would be able to pool your set of talents to a broader base, and then be able to divide work and then the game that would be created would have some chance standing in front of the rich featured rich content games created by behemoth companies.

[tommydanger 0]

I love the discussion

...It involves a lot more than coding. As I said in the first post, technology (which you worded as coding) is just a part of the gaming. What requires now is a lot more than that. That said, one may ask, is it not possible to create games like they used to in the last decades? Ofcourse it is possible, but it wont stand a chance against the phletora of games out there. The ones of the last decades were really gems in themselves - small and beautiful. But that is not the case in present times.
...

Well, you're right but only if you apply it to PC games.
For example take a look at Gameboy Advance or Nintendo DS games.
They "mirror" the old decade.
When you look at those systems games, they look simplistic compared to current PC or console games.
Most of the games that are being released are 2D topdown RPGs or fun games like Nintendogs, Brain Age.
But it doesn't matter if they lack of graphics (3D,pixel shader...), they still fun to play
Hence they even port older games on the NDS like for example FFIII.
I don't know it for fact but I think developing a game on NDS takes a lot less people than any other platform.
They don't have to deal with state of the art graphics due to limited hardware.
But that's not bad at all, they can do the game the same way as they did 10 years ago, and it works people buy it
As mentioned, they ported FFIII.
Sure they are interested in money but they woudn't port it if the game was boring.
Even if the game has nothing new to offer (both graphics and gameplay wise) the consumers still buy it, simply because it has a great storyline and gameplay.

Design - or in a bit of broader terms, content design itself is the key to the success of a game. And as you said, by the trends of the games of these days, people (target audience) just do not take any inferior detailed content in any game as passable. They just move on to next. Content is everything these days. And a lot of work goes into building these days, and as you correctly said, it takes more than one person to create a good game.

Yes sadly if you want to develop a PC game all you need is good graphics (in the first place).
You draw attention with good graphics.
The daily PC gamer don't care if you have an amazing storyline, if the graphics looks like one year old.
They want to experience a whole new world as this is why they spend a lot of money in new computer parts.

So, is there any hope for a single person to create a game? Well, if the drive is only passion for gaming, then no one can really stop someone from making a game. But if there is even a bit of financial motive in it, what I find as a plausible solution is to get more people like yourself who are interested in creating a game. I doubt there is any drought for such kind of people due to the number of threads in the Game Programming section here at Xisto forums.

Well, if I really want to do Game Design but I'm not part of the industry yet I would do NDS like games.Like a nice RPG, all you need is a coder and a artist.
If you're luck you can do it all yourself
But I wouldn't want to create a whole game, as time is limited I would try to create a demo of my game.
The demo must provide the core gameplay elements, all features you would like to see in the game should be implemented, ...aslong as they are possible of course
But before you even start think of a little storyline.
Basically it should be a little teaser of your original storyline.
15 minutes of gameplay should be enough.
Once you have that you can start your game as it will be a demo you don't have to worry that much thus making the developement part much easier.
It will also increase the chance that you will actually finish it
When you feel the demo is in a good shape you can start going to various game companies and say "Hey thats me and this is my little game that I wrote"
Atleast thats what I'm trying to do

Once you get a group of people going in for it, you would be able to pool your set of talents to a broader base, and then be able to divide work and then the game that would be created would have some chance standing in front of the rich featured rich content games created by behemoth companies.

Yes
When you're a small company I like the way MS is going with XNA:
https://www.visualstudio.com/vs/game-development/
Basically it's a pool of tools dedicated to game developing.
You can make games for Windows or XBox 360.
Atleast some XBox Arcade like games
But that's still a great opportunity for small companies.
You don't have to spend thousands of dollars for a XBox360 SDK.
Just download XNA and you're ready to go
However, to play your XNA based games on 360 you have to pay a little fee but it's affordable.
You can then decide if you send the game to microsoft and choose to publish the game on Xbox Arcade

[Vyoma 0]

Well, you're right but only if you apply it to PC games.For example take a look at Gameboy Advance or Nintendo DS games.
They "mirror" the old decade.
When you look at those systems games, they look simplistic compared to current PC or console games.
Most of the games that are being released are 2D topdown RPGs or fun games like Nintendogs, Brain Age.
But it doesn't matter if they lack of graphics (3D,pixel shader...), they still fun to play
Hence they even port older games on the NDS like for example FFIII.
I don't know it for fact but I think developing a game on NDS takes a lot less people than any other platform.
They don't have to deal with state of the art graphics due to limited hardware.
But that's not bad at all, they can do the game the same way as they did 10 years ago, and it works people buy it
As mentioned, they ported FFIII.
Sure they are interested in money but they woudn't port it if the game was boring.
Even if the game has nothing new to offer (both graphics and gameplay wise) the consumers still buy it, simply because it has a great storyline and gameplay.

Yes. To be honest, my posts seem to have missed the scope of Gameboy Advance or Nintendo DS games or similar category of games. I actually do not have any exposure to such platforms, and all of the games I played were on PC. But due to the reviews I have read in quite a few magazines, I am fairly aware of the hardware capabilities of such games. I think the same is quite true in terms of mobile games too - where one mostly needs to program a game in the Java MicroEdition platform.

In such cases, yes, not many hands are required for the making of games.

Yes sadly if you want to develop a PC game all you need is good graphics (in the first place).You draw attention with good graphics.
The daily PC gamer don't care if you have an amazing storyline, if the graphics looks like one year old.
They want to experience a whole new world as this is why they spend a lot of money in new computer parts.

Graphics I belive is just one part of the content package that I was talking about. It does serve its purpose of hooking the players initially to the game, but I think in the end players do care about a good story line. This is where the other parts of the conent of the game come into picture.

Well, if I really want to do Game Design but I'm not part of the industry yet I would do NDS like games.Like a nice RPG, all you need is a coder and a artist.
If you're luck you can do it all yourself
But I wouldn't want to create a whole game, as time is limited I would try to create a demo of my game.
The demo must provide the core gameplay elements, all features you would like to see in the game should be implemented, ...aslong as they are possible of course
But before you even start think of a little storyline.
Basically it should be a little teaser of your original storyline.
15 minutes of gameplay should be enough.
Once you have that you can start your game as it will be a demo you don't have to worry that much thus making the developement part much easier.
It will also increase the chance that you will actually finish it
When you feel the demo is in a good shape you can start going to various game companies and say "Hey thats me and this is my little game that I wrote"
Atleast thats what I'm trying to do
Yes
When you're a small company I like the way MS is going with XNA:
https://www.visualstudio.com/vs/game-development/
Basically it's a pool of tools dedicated to game developing.
You can make games for Windows or XBox 360.
Atleast some XBox Arcade like games
But that's still a great opportunity for small companies.
You don't have to spend thousands of dollars for a XBox360 SDK.
Just download XNA and you're ready to go
However, to play your XNA based games on 360 you have to pay a little fee but it's affordable.
You can then decide if you send the game to microsoft and choose to publish the game on Xbox Arcade

Now in terms of how I am thinking of approaching it is to really get a good content base. I have been working on getting a good content base on my own, from which I could choose to spawn concepts for games and interactive entertainment.

Creating games for Gameboy or NDS would be a choice I would not take, because we would get constrained by the proprietary technology of these companies. If I base my ideas on those systems, they would be dependent on those systems, and it would be difficult for moving to another system if I get a chance.

Hence, I am aiming at content creation. Making a good and vast detailed concept. Gaming is not the only thing that I am aiming, and hence choosing of the approach of a good content base seems prudent to me.

PS:

I love the discussion

A really good discussion indeed.