As usual, Snake-you're a genius!


It has been said many times that there is no such thing as an original idea.  While I might disagree, I *can* agree that it is hard to FIND an original idea-or at least an idea that can be executed WELL.

Unfortunately, I've been the victim (and I'm sure you have too) of the preemptive happy-dance when it comes to the expectations of a game. 

You see a teaser trailer.  You think, "THIS LOOKS AMAZING!" 

Then, you start seeing art and maybe a little trailer here and there online.  You start getting more excited.  "Oh, man, I'm so stoked!" you say.

Finally, you read a review or article in a gaming magazine as well as the rallying cry of the fan base as they all herald this game as the pinnacle of gaminess and that clinches your fate.  You pre-order the game, or at the very least, won't shut up about how awesome the game is going to be to all of your friends, significant other, dog, goldfish, etc until everyone starts making excuses whenever they see you coming with that starry look in your eyes.

But, just like the star-crossed lovers in Romeo and Juliet, you find that the reality of your oh-so-anticipated game is a lot less....glamorous...than the hype.

Which brings me to my next point (which was really also my first point).


Do you haz it?

Now, I'm the first person to say that technology still has a ways to go before it's super duper futuristic (see yesterday's blog for more on that tangent).  However, we have come quite a ways since the days of the Atari.  We have the ability to make amazing game play, graphics that are practically photo-realistic, and story depth that would rival that of some of the so-called Great American Novelists.

There is just no real good excuse to make a game that sucks.

And there is just no real good excuse to BUY a game that sucks.

For example, WHY do we still have games that involve copious amounts of soul-crushing GRIND?  There are plenty of better ways to level up and gain experience than fighting a hundred thousand level 1 slimes. 

Why do we have games with mandatory random battles?

Why do we have this morbid fascination with "impossibly hard games that make you want to snap the controller in half"?

I can forgive the idea that games in the past had to play by these sorts of rules due to the limits of the technology at the time, but why do people INSIST on holding onto these horribly outdated modes of gameplay?

Even Tony Stark knows the drill.

If we have the technology, and we have the knowledge, what's keeping the video game industry from making quality games on a regular basis?  And why do we have so many crappy licensed titles (remember the SNES Aladdin game?  It was AMAZINGLY FUN platforming fun, even though it was difficult..and the Bugs Bunny games for Game Boy are classic and hugely fun as well) when it's completely possible to come up with a high quality and well executed game using licensed characters!

Bottom line, in my opinion, making games should be like minding your manners.

If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all.

So I say to Game Designers:

If you don't have a good game to make, then don't make a game at all!


So, what do you think about the logic used to make half-aused games even when gamers are clamoring for quality (Sonic Games Of Late, I am looking at you!)?

Will you be entering my "design a video game contest"?  You have until Friday night to come up with 1-2 awesome game ideas to be voted on by the GIO blogging community.

Link To Contest Rules:


To end today's rainbow-tastic blog, I leave you with a video that says it all: