Indulgent Creativity

Okay, I admit, one of the themes of this blog seems to be me making up terms so that I can explain myself, and I just did it again, but this is a seriously undervalued concept, and I don't know if there is formal game design language to discuss it. Also, this is meant to be a follow-up to my previous article , so if you haven't already, I recommend you read that first. Okay, now on to the definitions. Volume of Content Consumers want lots of content. And game developers try to meet that desire by building new environments with new enemies with new mechanics. On some level, you have to do this, but there are problems with using this as the primary way to create continuing interest and variety for your players. Encourages Patterns Rather Than Tactics: As described in the previous post, a new boss with a new set of mechanics doesn't really require players to think tactically. They just need to learn a new pattern. Once you figure out the basic techniques

I still rank Warcraft 3 as one of my all-time favorite games, and during its peak, I would have called it my favorite. Which is why I had an intense prejudice against DotA for so long. It looked to me like a modder had taken WC3, removed 90% of the game, enhanced the remaining 10% a bit, and the crowds of shallow people who just couldn't handle the greatness of the full game all migrated over to playing a small fraction of it. It was a long time before I was willing to try it and even longer before I was willing to admit that it was good (despite being hooked in my very first game). Month after month, I almost always preferred to play DotA over WC3, but I had to tell myself it was only because DotA was newer, and I'd go back to preferring the unmodded game. I still didn't understand what made DotA so good, so admitting that I liked it better was admitting that I preferred the shallow game, and my ego couldn't handle that. Because how could controlling one hero with

There's a conversation I've had a number of times in one form or another. It tends to go something like this: Person 1: It was mostly a good book, but it was unrealistic when the hero sailed safely down the river despite knowing nothing about boats. Person 2: Wait! You're reading a book full of dragons and wizards, and you think the unrealistic part was the sailing??? Person 1: <awkwardly> Well, um, it's hard to explain, but it just doesn't feel right... I have found this conversation frustrating because I tend to be person 1. I think I'm right, but I'm not quite able to articulate what I meant in order to counter Person 2's snappy 1-liner.  So now it's time to fix that. Fantasy vs. Nonsense If you were truly to write a story that abandoned reality, it would probably go something like this. "Bob teleported to the kitchen to destroy the universe again, now that it had started complaining. How else could the flower chickens grow?&q