Creating Good Games: It’s Not Rocket Science!

What do I see when I walk down the video games aisle at Wal-Mart? A bunch of fucking games that I don’t want to play! Why don’t I want to play them? Because they suck! Even if the gameplay, controls, or interface are good enough to hold my attention for an hour or two, I can’t possibly justify paying $50 or more for a game that I can’t reasonably expect to play for at least 30+ hours. That might sound like a long fucking time, but I think $50 is a lot of fucking money.

The painful reality for all serious gamers is that we have to deal with a shit storm of crappy games all the time. There are games with convoluted, unresponsive controls or games that are so drop-dead boring that it would be more entertaining to smash yourself in the face with your keyboard (or controller). Game developers act like the victims of a scary and unpredictable market when their games don’t sell, but the real victims are the people who nervously shell out $60 for the latest Xbox 360 game that some noob at IGN was paid to say is really awesome, only to bring it home and realize they got ripped off again.

It doesn’t have to be that way. Why is it so hard for game studios to make a game that is fun? It seems like nearly every developer focuses on a few features of their game, but refuses to put in the work to make the game perform in every aspect. Crysis only focuses on fancy graphics, yet Crytek blamed piracy for lackluster sales (that’s an original excuse). When Spore was being developed, the makers promised a game that was almost godlike in the ability of the player to create nearly any creature they desire, and then to create a society from those creatures which could even mimic  the traits of the player who created it. What did we get? A bunch of under-developed mini games that were supposed to represent the different stages of biological and societal evolution. Sure, you could give your creature as many legs as you wanted, but it didn’t really change the way it walked. Spore was such a disappointment that it was almost like being pranked when playing it for the first time.

The most frustrating thing about all of this is that if most game developers were willing to put in the effort to create good games, they would definitely be enjoying better sales. Right now the most popular way for big studios to produce games is to pump them out as fast as possible, sequel after prequel after sequel, hyping them like they were the second coming of Jesus, and then selling them for exorbitant prices. Not only does this strategy fuck over the consumer, but it’s also completely short-sighted from a business standpoint as well. Want to know who is raking in the cash? Blizzard Entertainment and Valve, and you want to know how they’re doing it? By making good games and supporting them for a long, long time after their release!

Here is a list of things that any game development company can do to not only make a good game, but also make some good money:

—-

1. Pay attention to the details. Your game should be well-rounded in every respect. You may not be able to work with the most advanced graphics technology, but you don’t have to. Just make sure the game is artistic. Make sure the controls are both smooth and precise. Don’t just shit out an interface, actually take some time to redo it a few times until it’s easy to understand and fast to use. Absolutely make sure that your game doesn’t have game-breaking bugs upon release, and patch any other bugs you know about as quickly as you can.

2. Play test your games. Nobody, and I mean nobody, wants to play your game if you haven’t even made sure that it works properly first. You should test every little thing about your game before you put it on the shelf. Anything else is just plain unethical.

3. Have deep gameplay. Most games are just too shallow to enjoy for any long period of time. There shouldn’t be so many controls that the player is overwhelmed, but the player should be able to use the given controls or gameplay mechanics to play the game many different ways (see Starcraft).

4. Support the game after release. This step is very important. Starcraft is a good example of what can happen if you patch the game for over ten years after its release. You might just have an entire country of video game fanatics playing your game in professional tournaments! Things to patch into your game after release are bug fixes (obviously), balance fixes or changes, and content additions (which will keep gamers loyal for a very long time). Now that every gaming system has a hard drive, there is absolutely no excuse not to patch your games.

5. Give your game replay value. Gamers feel especially gypped when they can only play through a game one time before it’s too boring to bear any more. It doesn’t matter how you do it (enhanced difficulty levels, end game features, trophies to collect, ect) as long as you do something to keep players hooked and having fun.

6. Finally, respect your reputation. People will flock to the stores to buy the next Diablo or Half-Life installment because they expect it to be great, but they will also be unimaginably pissed off if it sucks. Gamers rarely forgive, and they never forget when game companies hype up and then release a crappy game. When a game developer has a strong enough reputation, there will literally be gamers salivating over every release and lining up at stores overnight just to get them.

—-

The video game market is huge. The world is full of gamers who are starving for quality games to play, but good ones barely ever come out! If a game studio is willing to follow the steps listed above, then they will almost certainly find success. Most developers, however, are reluctant to spend the amount of time and effort necessary to do that. I guess most developers are happy with their less than fantastic sales figures. Just remember that it’s no secret why Blizzard and Valve are swimming in the green stuff! And also, don’t complain when your piece of shit game that you churned out in less than a year isn’t impressing anyone either!