View Single Post
Old 17 October 2001, 01:12   #36
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Drake1009
Somewhat like books I'd reckon. You get a lot more from books than you do from movies (If you don't mind spending the time reading that is).
You are right there - I didn't mean to imply that a book has less 'detail' than a movie. I was referring to the lack of sensory detail - which with games allows the game play to be fully appreciated – or bypassed if it’s no good to start with. For every classic game there were 100 crap ones.

For years there has been talk about 'One man can not make a hit game, because of the production value required'. I believe this is mostly true To build something that competes with the standard on playstation, PC etc, you need a huge budget, marketing – and still don’t be surprised if you don’t get your money back, because again, you are competing with all those clones.

I still think that anyone with a good idea can get it off the ground in some way. Maybe not get it off the ground, but into the undergroud. The last 'bigger than expected' success in my memory is Tetris. This was made in the era where production values were going up, but a very simple concept could still compete. Today though, you may not get something like that in the Top 10 of sales – but 10% of a huge market is still bigger than 70% of an 80s market. Then perhaps Nintendo will pick it up and turn it into a Pokemon puzzle.. OK, I'll shut up now

My favourite 64 games and why:

Monty On The Run – his universe was huge, well designed and ever changing – I just had to explore more.

Chiller – Painfully hard to control gave me that extra challenge.. And it was oh so spooky.

Thrust – Probably the first game I played that used Sine math.
Page generated in 0.03843 seconds with 10 queries