At 10/2/06 10:23 PM, LordTrunks wrote: Who knows? Maybe I just thought up the newest fad of avoider games xD

Theres this game in which you controlled a blue thing.. i cant remember the name nor the author. But it was cool, you could get bigger, smaller, and change colors to fit your needs. Thing is, it was controlled by the mouse.

Ball Revamped is also a great game.

At 10/2/06 10:28 PM, Blaze wrote: Theres this game in which you controlled a blue thing.. i cant remember the name nor the author. But it was cool, you could get bigger, smaller, and change colors to fit your needs. Thing is, it was controlled by the mouse.

was it Rainbowsphere ???

At 10/2/06 10:15 PM, ImpotentBoy2 wrote: is there anything past level 4 drawer

There is level 5 which I think is the highest. I believe you need a sub 70 second time to get it. But that wasn't enough for me, I got a sub 60 second time :D.

At 10/2/06 10:34 PM, 23450 wrote: was it Rainbowsphere ???

No, you were some sort of blue animal that followed the mouse. I've searched, but i cant find it. IM pretty sure it had up to 5 sequels, i cant remember the name. Dang.

At 10/2/06 10:39 PM, Blaze wrote:

At 10/2/06 10:34 PM, 23450 wrote: was it Rainbowsphere ???

No, you were some sort of blue animal that followed the mouse. I've searched, but i cant find it. IM pretty sure it had up to 5 sequels, i cant remember the name. Dang.

I know, that's the EXACT one I'm talking about! You hit it right on the dot. I think it has a collection somewhere, and the game was on the front page.

And rainbowsphere is the best game EVAR imho :D

almost

At 10/2/06 11:08 PM, LordTrunks wrote: I know, that's the EXACT one I'm talking about! You hit it right on the dot. I think it has a collection somewhere, and the game was on the front page.

I remember seeing it on the frontpage, GOD im so bad with names. :P

And rainbowsphere is the best game EVAR imho :D

Yeah! I was just playing it, its a bit jumpy (its old) but hey, its pretty good.

At 10/2/06 11:08 PM, LordTrunks wrote: And rainbowsphere is the best game EVAR imho :D

almost

that brings me to another question.

What makes a good game???

I mean, its obviously not a good script job (we've all seen that stupid super flash bros flash), and not always innovation, not always graphics, etc. Im sure there is some sort of trend that follows good games in general.

I for one think the simple game normally the funnest to play. i dont think little kids in thier basements are capable of making a really complicated game and still make it good. I think alot of complicated games out there that just dont play very well. its the simple ones that are always the best i think.

At 10/2/06 11:15 PM, 23450 wrote: What makes a good game???

Could you have stepped on any more toes in your response to that question?

At 10/2/06 11:18 PM, Luis wrote:

At 10/2/06 11:15 PM, 23450 wrote: What makes a good game???

Could you have stepped on any more toes in your response to that question?

i was thinking so. but there has to be some sort of trend. like....what makes good music? its always up to the persons taste, but there is an obvious trend on what is popularand good. dont you think? or is the question a little to vague....

its not that they're simple to make its that they're simple to play. in fact most really good games look very easy but are in fact highly complicated.

At 10/2/06 11:24 PM, ImpotentBoy2 wrote: its not that they're simple to make its that they're simple to play.

You have a point, I don't want to play some pumped up super-mega game with hard controls and complicated aspects, simply because if I want that I'll go pick up my Xbox or PS2 and play.

Blaze wrote:
I remember seeing it on the frontpage, GOD im so bad with names. :P

I'm worse, I never remember names... I'd be like "Yeah, I know... who are you again?" in mid conversation.... roflcake :)

I'm searching for it, but I can't find it >_<

At 10/2/06 11:31 PM, fudgefalcon wrote: That ends my intro rant......

...first of all, what was the point of that rant??? you dont need those.

and secondly, its not just for regulars, anyone can come in.

At 10/2/06 11:23 PM, 23450 wrote: i was thinking so. but there has to be some sort of trend. like....what makes good music?

thats reminds me of a flash idea i have about the difference between art and media. i havent been thinking about it much, basically theres to people (brothers maybe) and their both god at something like violin or whatever. and everbody loves one kids stuff, the other ones jealous. so he steals his hands so he can be the crowd favorite. but nothing changes, and the handless kid starts singing, yada yada- he steals his tongue. the kid starts dancing or something. so he steals his legs. i dont know where to go from here i think ill just have a bunch of things pour out of his head.

sorry for pushing all these idea out on you, i just dont know what else to talk about

At 10/2/06 11:15 PM, 23450 wrote: What makes a good game???

Addiction, if the game is addictive then it would be good. take a look at that Super smash bro's flash, that sucked balls, but it was good because it was addictive..

At 10/2/06 11:36 PM, Vengeance wrote:

At 10/2/06 11:15 PM, 23450 wrote: What makes a good game???

Addiction, if the game is addictive then it would be good. take a look at that Super smash bro's flash, that sucked balls, but it was good because it was addictive..

i really hated that game. it was poorly made annd annoyying, maybe i was the only one who didnt find it addictive

At 10/2/06 11:36 PM, Vengeance wrote:

At 10/2/06 11:15 PM, 23450 wrote: What makes a good game???

Addiction, if the game is addictive then it would be good. take a look at that Super smash bro's flash, that sucked balls, but it was good because it was addictive..

i wish there was an easy way to tap into that. i mean, what makes it addictive? smaller games tend to have that, but i wish i knew that seperated the addictive ones to the play once for 1 minute and leave games...i geuss its a little but of luck in alot of cases.

and alot of the time i vote on games because they are made well, not because they are fun. like if the graphics are nice and the gameplay is deacent, i will 5 it, after playing it for 2 minutes and never going back to it. do you do that?

true, but the wii is going to open that door i think.

anyway yeah increasing difficulty is key, but solid gameplay is a must have, if you can't enjoy pressing those buttons you won't want to even try to get to level 30.

haha then again there are a million factors in a good game so you can't exactly pick out just one... you need to have all the right building blocks.

pfft... maybe not a million factors

At 10/2/06 11:39 PM, 23450 wrote: i wish there was an easy way to tap into that. I mean, what makes it addictive?

Ok, a list of what I try to include in games:
addicting - If the game is addicting then people will play it for a long time, and should vote higher.

challenging - Make the game a challenge from the word go. If it's a challenge then naturally the human mind will want to conquer over it.

original - if it's an original concept, then it (should) go higher in the portal than something done a thousand times. take the four second series, that's the only flash like that on newgrounds, and look at it's success!

artwork - Of course, people prefer too look at well designed characters, rather than a stick figure that took you 4 seconds to draw. But you can't go over the top with artwork, or else it lags up the PC.

humor - People play games for fun, laughter is a representation of fun, if the game makes you laugh of course you're going to vote it up.

I agree that difficulty makes a good game, but so does alot of things, its like a jigsaw puzzle really, you just need to make sure you have all the parts.

Presentation - A good game is always presented well, with great music, graphics and awesome menus/options and other bonus bits.

Graphics - If a game doesn't have good graphics, it's not gonna be favoured well because of how it reflects on the creators.

Gameplay - I learnt this recently, I was playing games through NG that were coded awesomely, that's when it hit me that good games need to be coded well, or just well enough to get the game working, but things like api are incredibly affective for a game through coding.

Originality - People seem to like games more when they're completely new ideas, or just the average game where the author decides to twist it for a completely different outcome, I tend to make this the highest priority first.

Scoreboards - People like peoples games, but they like them more when they have a scoreboard, its just one of those things that keeps the novelty going longer, people will be playing to top the scoreboard all the time from there.

---

There're prolly tonnes of thigns to make a game better.

At 10/2/06 11:15 PM, 23450 wrote: What makes a good game???

That's a tricky question. By the standard of "good" for this post, I am going to relate "good" to what the Newgrounds audience is seeking in a game. So yes, where to be begin...

It's all about the hook. Take a fish that you are reeling in. The more it tugs, the harder you have to pull it in. Same goes for Flash games. The longer you keep the hook, the longer you are going to be able to reel in the big fish (in case metaphor escapes you, just keep your audience as long as possible).

I have a few ideas.

First, the control. A game that is simple yet logical is going to be able to introduce simple gameplay into the first few levels. The last thing a user wants is a game that is hard to control, or needs multple pages of instructions on what keys to use. The user should within a few seconds learn the controls.

Second, the motivation. The user needs a reason to continue playing. There's thousands of Flash games out there, so why yours? You'll need to give a good reason to the user. Whether it is for high scores, bragging rights, or whatever, give the user something to feel good about. It is so easy to close a Flash window when you paid nothing for it, so make sure you give a chunk of motivational use for playing.

Third, the replay. Most flash games will not have a fantastic replay value, because most are bent on the idea of one play, one go, all done. If you introduce components that are not necessarily introduced in the first round of gameplay, but can be achieved by certain tasks, then there is definitely replay value. Maybe the idea of random levels or goals to achieve to unlock other areas. The biggest factor of replay is the simple implementation of a high score list, which will have users playing time and time again to beat high scores, and better yet, introduce your game to others to start beating high scores?

Fourth, the polish of audio. People will close windows if the sound sucks. It's true. Taking the extra few hours to develop your own sounds or to find some off the internet can be a huge factor in your game. Same for music. Music, if repetitive and boring, will irk the player, and will destract from your actual game. Inversely, no music will make the game boring. Your audience needs filler for sound, so make sure you fulfill it.

Fifth, cross genre. We've seen platformers a thousand times, and we've seen a mouse avoider every other day. Try combining components to make a kick ass game. Sidescrolling fused with RPG? Hot stuff.

Sixth, if you play the stats card, play it right. People are always wowed by numbers like "I have 50 different power ups". It counts for nothing if those powerups do not live up anywhere to the game, or are inaccessible. In fact, people will drag down your score for your failure to meet expectations. Make sure you live up to your claims, and not make a bunch of garbage to make your statistics seem better.

Seventh, take the extremes for time. Fast-paced is extremely popular on the web right now, but in order to hold your audience, you'll need to make your games last as long as a normal Flash game. Keep up your pace, but make sure that the gameplay is actually worth while. Same for slower, puzzle games. Make sure that objectives are accomplished with pizazz, so that users are not bored to death with simple tweens as their accomplishment.

Eighth, give them a score that means something. People love to have something to measure up to others. Generic final scores these days are cutting it thin. Try giving them something like a letter grade or a smaller rating (like nine out of ten). This will define their scores much easier than something like 2352 points, which is meaningless unless at least two games are played.

Ninth, Mise-en-scene. Make sure that everything captured within the viewing area of the Flash is colorful and captures the audience. A wonderful background can make a lot of games feel much more professional. Even something as simple as a light gradient instead of a solid color makes the background insanely better. Understand depth, maybe try playing around with parallax, and have the background move slower than the foreground. Make the evironment interactive, such as the ability to scorch walls or cause damage to surroundings.

Tenth, work with popular ideas, integrate new ideas. That is how the gaming industry has worked for years. No matter what, you'll have a component of a game be part of another game, its unavoidable. However, you can always integrate your new ideas and make a huge splash.

Eleventh, guns, explosions, sex, and rock 'n' roll. Very popular in games right now, but slowly starting to decline. Games like the Sims, Katamari Damacy, sports games in general, other genres and games are definitely starting to rise up among the hack and slash titles that are still quite popular. You'll still see a score boost from a game that sports a few different gun choices and a plethora of guys to kill.

Twelveth, sometimes being unoriginal counts. Remember that you are going to get points automatically for using Mario or Sonic, as much as many may disagree with me. But remember that people are going to be able to judge your game to every other game they have ever played, including console games, so you may have a fight to put up with if you are using other people's characters or ideas.

Thirteenth, the element of surprise. Push the expectation of the user, and integrate parts that were not necessarily covered in the introduction, or that totally flow outside the normal style of the genre. People love a good game that is always jumping outside the normal bounds of what they are used to, and will keep that hook in them for longer and longer.

Fourteenth, give resolution. I have played so many games that end at level 17, and merely say "The End". Make you game end on a solid number, with a solid ending. A solid ending includes a reason why your game ends there, such as a final boss, or an ending animation. Make sure you give that resolution so that users have a reason to want to play it again, instead of being left high and dry. In fact...

Fifteenth, provide narrative if the game so needs it. Self-explanatory, if your game has a story, keep the story going and make the elements of the game run with the narrative.

And thats my thoughts, mostly because I am running out of characters. Sorry for my long words :).

At 10/3/06 02:18 AM, jmtb02 wrote: And thats my thoughts, mostly because I am running out of characters. Sorry for my long words :).

Woah, if I ever learn ActionScript abd make games I'll keep that in mind...no wait I'll save it in word cause it's too much to remember but it's very well said and true.

At 10/2/06 11:15 PM, 23450 wrote: I for one think the simple game normally the funnest to play. i dont think little kids in thier basements are capable of making a really complicated game and still make it good. I think alot of complicated games out there that just dont play very well. its the simple ones that are always the best i think.

Nah, you can have complicated games which are really good to play. The thing is, though, they have to be complicated because it supports the type of game you're going for, rather than just complex for the sake of complex. Never set out to make something which is complicated; just try to make it as your instincts direct you to.

Pattern Recognition.

After stripping a game away to it's core elements, so that it looks like Pong in your mind, if you can't see a reliable pattern to follow that can be drawn on paper with Xs and O's, the game is bound to fail.

Games appeal to the pattern recognition part of our brain - the animal part that puts you on autopilot as you climb into the shower every morning, or allows you to think clearly whilst buttering toast and pouring coffee without concentrating on it. Or even the part that makes you drive to work in the morning without even seeing the road because you've revised it to a fine art.

Every game appeals to this section of our brain- but the best games are the ones that challenge it, whilst at the same time making us revise it to perfection. Games that force you to rely on random chance aren't games - they're physics simulators.

Chess is a pattern exercise par excellance - each piece only moves one way, but the complexity of the game knows no bounds regardless. There is no randomness in chess either, and it is universally seen as the best game in the world. This is why I put no stock in the whole "games promoting violence" rant - gamers are adept at turning a game into a pattern in thier mind that whilst on the surface it looks like they're robbing a bank and killing hundreds of police officers, to them it's Space Invaders in thier minds eyes.

At 10/3/06 04:45 AM, KaynSlamdyke wrote: Pattern Recognition.

After stripping a game away to it's core elements, so that it looks like Pong in your mind, if you can't see a reliable pattern to follow that can be drawn on paper with Xs and O's, the game is bound to fail.

Games appeal to the pattern recognition part of our brain - the animal part that puts you on autopilot as you climb into the shower every morning, or allows you to think clearly whilst buttering toast and pouring coffee without concentrating on it. Or even the part that makes you drive to work in the morning without even seeing the road because you've revised it to a fine art.

Every game appeals to this section of our brain- but the best games are the ones that challenge it, whilst at the same time making us revise it to perfection. Games that force you to rely on random chance aren't games - they're physics simulators.

Chess is a pattern exercise par excellance - each piece only moves one way, but the complexity of the game knows no bounds regardless. There is no randomness in chess either, and it is universally seen as the best game in the world. This is why I put no stock in the whole "games promoting violence" rant - gamers are adept at turning a game into a pattern in thier mind that whilst on the surface it looks like they're robbing a bank and killing hundreds of police officers, to them it's Space Invaders in thier minds eyes.

Wow, that makes so much sense and also proves that games like GTA don't really promote violence...though some people have very very very impressionable minds and do things that happen in games.
What about games that involve randomness but they also involve a pattern? Such as a random amount of enemies(somewhere between 10-20) appear in a room and you have to kill them but thats just part of the game, though the game does this for every room and you are involved in accomplishing set objectives such as obtaining a...ROCK!(a very special rock)...but to obtain this rock you have to do some objectives and kill the people in the room.
Would that be basicly a game that involves patterns?

At 10/2/06 11:15 PM, 23450 wrote: What makes a good game???

I mean, its obviously not a good script job (we've all seen that stupid super flash bros flash)

Meanie! :'(

I'm gonna assume you meant super smash bros ;)

The things that Dim and I focus on when making a game are as follows:

Graphical presentation: Obviously Dim's in charge of this one for the most part. Whilst the graphics don't have to be great (just look at Nightmare) they do have to all fit together. Eg, if you're using sprites, it'll look that much better if you use sprite backgrounds. Line thickness comes into play here too. Basically, decide on a style and stick with it.

Controls: Smooth, fluid control of a game is very important. If you've never used testers before, you really should, because everyone uses their keyboard and mouse differently. Just because its never bugged out when you play doesnt mean it wont when others do. Have you considered what happens when a user presses two opposite directions at once? Never underestimate the stupidity of your user. ;)

Reward: Always give your user something to aim for. In most of the games I play on consoles, there's some sort of ending sequence, even in tetris! A single end screen can work too, as long as it has some appeal like a high score or some unlocks. If your game is more than a mini-game (eg platformer, rpg), think about having a credits sequence set to awesome music, just as long as its not too long and you compress your damn audio!

Fun-factor: If you can make a game where even just running about is a joy, then good for you, but its not common. You have to think about what makes your game fun. After making your game, you're gonna have tested it countless times, but if you still find it fun, thats a good measure. If not, get others to test it and rate it for fun. Improve it if need be

Audio: Whilst compression is very important, make sure its not too dirty. At the same time, get quality sound effects - there are loads of places where you can get them for free. Music, I think, is super important in a game. There needs to be some, even if its a simple bed. Music can set a mood and really add to the experience of the game, so look around for a while - the audio portal is getting better every day!

Like a lot of things in life, good games come down to 'bait, hook, reel, release'
Bait: This comes down to what you write on the NG page, including the title.
Hook: The first 10 seconds of gameplay have to be good enough to keep the user in your game.
Reel: Keep up the fun, adding new ellements as the game progresses.
Release: Give them their reward and send them on their merry way. But if possible, include a bait for their next play-through ;)

Tom~

At 10/3/06 07:00 AM, The-Super-Flash-Bros wrote: Tom~

One thing that also helps with the bait is who the authour is, if you're famous on newgrounds then a lot of people will expect something good.
You also did manage to get an extra replay out of me with the special weapon at the end of Nightmare.
Oh yeah I'm gonna save that post too.

At 10/3/06 07:59 AM, skooj-lik-chaah wrote:

At 10/3/06 07:00 AM, The-Super-Flash-Bros wrote: Tom~

One thing that also helps with the bait is who the authour is, if you're famous on newgrounds then a lot of people will expect something good.

Sad but true. I love it though. Long live flash divas.

-L

At 10/3/06 08:03 AM, Luis wrote:

At 10/3/06 07:59 AM, skooj-lik-chaah wrote:

At 10/3/06 07:00 AM, The-Super-Flash-Bros wrote: Tom~

One thing that also helps with the bait is who the authour is, if you're famous on newgrounds then a lot of people will expect something good.

Sad but true. I love it though. Long live flash divas.

-L

I know the best example of that too, Tricky the Clown is a tribute to a flash called Happy the Clown. Tricky lived on because Dan Paladin made it but Happy got blammed.

At 10/3/06 04:45 AM, KaynSlamdyke wrote: Chess is a pattern exercise par excellance - each piece only moves one way, but the complexity of the game knows no bounds regardless. There is no randomness in chess either, and it is universally seen as the best game in the world.

Which I suck at :)

The thing you have to remember, though, is that although there's a big difference between complexity and randomness, if something is complex enough it gains the appearence of something random. Take rolling dice, for example. If you mapped out the exact texture of the floor and the force applied to the die, you could probably predict with high accuracy the number it would land on. However, it is still very much random in the practical sense. The same can go for any number of apparently random events.

At 10/3/06 08:21 AM, Paranoia wrote: The thing you have to remember, though, is that although there's a big difference between complexity and randomness, if something is complex enough it gains the appearence of something random. Take rolling dice, for example. If you mapped out the exact texture of the floor and the force applied to the die, you could probably predict with high accuracy the number it would land on. However, it is still very much random in the practical sense. The same can go for any number of apparently random events.

I thought randomness was that we call anything that has too many variables to consider and too much effort to figure out the answer so we just decide that it's random when random is impossible.