PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Gamasutra's "Dogma 2001": No more exploding heads?!
February 20th 2001, 09:11 CET by brennan

<a href="http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20010129/adams_01.htm">Gamasutra has posted an article</a> laying out what the author calls 'Dogma 2001: A Challenge to Game Designers.'  In a nutshell, inspired by the <a href="http://www.dogme95.dk/menu/menuset.htm">'Dogme '95'</a> art-film "vow of chastity," Gamasutra essentially proposes that game designers adopt a set of rules that, ideally, will promote creativity, purity, relevance, and, well, art in their art.  These rules for Dogme 95 included no special effects, no bringing in props, and no credit for the director.  For Dogma 2001, Gamasutra's rules would include no hardware acceleration, no first-person shooters, no pre-rendered cutscenes, no blood a-flyin', and so forth.

Interesting.  Aside from putting John Carmack on the streets and destitute, I see a few problems with this approach.  One problem is that any such vow is nearly impossible to fulfill.  Witness the actual practice of Dogme 95: Lars Von Trier himself, the director of 'Dancer in the Dark' and one of the originators of Dogme 95, has often violated the rules in D95's vow.  In fact, although I don't have a link, I believe that none of the people who came up with Dogme 95 have actually made a pure Dogme film; they've ALL violated it in one way or another in each one of their films.

Another problem is that, to reference Dogme 95 and film again, always sticking to such rules would mean that films like 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon' wouldn't get made.  And I don't see that as a good thing in any way, <i>even if</i> D95 would mercifully prevent us from ever again enduring something like 'The Waterboy.'  The same goes for Gamasutra's Dogma 2001: a lack of Half-Life just isn't quite balanced out by a lack of Daikatana.

That said, some of the ideas in the Gamasutra piece are interesting, and despite the fact that no developer will ever ever follow such a set of rules (well, maybe Levelord, depending on what he ingests), I think Gamasutra's heart is in the right place.  They're trying to spark debate, and they know that no developers will pay the slightest attention.  So, how's about some debate?
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Gamasutra's "Dogma 2001": No more exploding heads?!

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "Morn"
2001-02-20 09:12:39
morn@planetcrap.com http://www.planetcrap.com
Here's another reader submission... Thanks brennan!

- Morn
#2 by "deadlock"
2001-02-20 10:27:50
deadlock@eircom.net
I don't think that the Dogme 95 principals were strict manifestos as such, merely a set of guidelines that should (rather than must) be adhered to. So while Von Triers' films don't necessarily stick to all of the tenets set out in Dogme 95, they stick to a fair proportion of them, and are informed by them.

To be honest, I think that although the Gamasutra idea is an interesting one, it'd ultimately turn out to be trite. Computer games are, by their nature, technically driven, so trying to divorce a game from the technology of its' time is a bit like building a house in a quarry without using stone.

deadlock
#3 by "enyak"
2001-02-20 12:05:25
enyak@planetcrap.com
2. The use of hardware 3D acceleration of any sort is forbidden. Software 3D engines are not forbidden, but the game must run at 20 frames per second or better in 640 x 480 16-bit SVGA mode or the nearest available equivalent.


This is just stupid. One of the article's early points is
"Even though implementing the technology is the business of programmers, not designers, it still consumes attention that the designer should be spending on the game's world, rules and behavior."
and yet they constrict themselves to not using high-level APIs? Seems to me creating a fullfeatured software rasterizer engine (3D or 2D) would be a lot more demanding on the programmers (and thus the designers, following the article's logic).

-enyak
#4 by "Foogla"
2001-02-20 13:20:56
Foogla@gmx.de
blah

I agree with JeffD.
#5 by "The Joker"
2001-02-20 13:51:01
joker@junkextreme.com http://www.junkextreme.com
what a piece of crap.

Joker.
#6 by "The Joker"
2001-02-20 14:19:58
joker@junkextreme.com http://www.junkextreme.com
http://www.dreamcastmagazine.com/images/doa2/leifangboots800.jpg
http://www.dreamcastmagazine.com/images/doa2/leifangback800.jpg
http://www.dreamcastmagazine.com/images/doa2/sleeping800.jpg
http://www.dreamcastmagazine.com/images/doa2/tina800.jpg
http://www.dreamcastmagazine.com/images/doa2/kasumirecline800.jpg
http://www.dreamcastmagazine.com/images/doa2/kasumi800.jpg
http://www.dreamcastmagazine.com/images/doa2/kasumicasual800.jpg
http://www.dreamcastmagazine.com/images/doa2/tinawhite800.jpg
http://www.dreamcastmagazine.com/images/doa2/leifang800.jpg
http://www.dreamcastmagazine.com/images/doa2/helenaswim800.jpg

ooh yes! YES!!!!

Joker.
#7 by "FunkDrunk"
2001-02-20 14:43:36
jflavius@bellatlantic.com
If we were to follow those rules every game would be the Incredible Machine.

Funk
#8 by "FunkDrunk"
2001-02-20 14:57:31
jflavius@bellatlantic.com
Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Funk
#9 by "^mortis^"
2001-02-20 16:33:06
mortis@goddamnindependent.com http://www.goddamnindependent.com
from zee manifesto:  
The auteur concept was bourgeois romanticism from the very start and thereby ... false!
To DOGME 95 cinema is not individual!


This is so unbelievably fruity and pretentious that it smacks of being French, rather than Danish.  
I will now hide my BFA in shame...i no longer want to be associated with the Fine Arts community. :P


^M^
#10 by "Zachack"
2001-02-20 17:06:32
zachrounds@un-named.com
4. There shall be no knights, elves, dwarves or dragons. Nor shall there be any wizards, wenches, bards, bartenders, golems, giants, clerics, necromancers, thieves, gods, angels, demons, sorceresses, undead bodies or body parts (mummified or decaying), Nazis, Russians, spies, mercenaries, space marines, stormtroopers, star pilots, humanoid robots, evil geniuses, mad scientists, or carnivorous aliens. And no freakin' vampires.

Ok.  Someone make a game involving French Beatniks.

7. Violence is strictly limited to the disappearance or immobilization of destroyed units. Units which are damaged or destroyed shall be so indicated by symbolic, not representational, means. There shall be no blood, explosions, or injury or death animations.

Where you can beat them nearly, but not completely, to death.

8. There may be victory and defeat, and my side and their side, but there may not be Good and Evil.

And we get to play as Wiccan Socialists.

3. Only the following input devices are allowed: on a console machine, the controller which normally ships with it. On a computer, a 2-axis joystick with two buttons, or a D-pad with two buttons; a standard 101-key PC keyboard; a 2-button mouse.

All gameplay can be accomplished by pressing the spacebar.  Bonus points if you can make the game feel like you are hitting a feeder bar.
#11 by "Zachack"
2001-02-20 17:08:57
zachrounds@un-named.com
Modification to

7. Violence is strictly limited to the disappearance or immobilization of destroyed units. Units which are damaged or destroyed shall be so indicated by symbolic, not representational, means. There shall be no blood, explosions, or injury or death animations.

Where you can beat them nearly, but not completely, to death

Replace "beat to near death" with "Throw latte on their clothes, forcing them to leave and buy new sweaters from J. Crew.
#12 by "jason"
2001-02-20 17:39:06
jason@loonygames.com http://www.bluesnews.com/
Another problem is that, to reference Dogme 95 and film again, always sticking to such rules would mean that films like 'Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon' wouldn't get made. And I don't see that as a good thing in any way, even if D95 would mercifully prevent us from ever again enduring something like 'The Waterboy.' The same goes for Gamasutra's Dogma 2001: a lack of Half-Life just isn't quite balanced out by a lack of Daikatana.


You miss the point entirely. The point of Dogma wasn't to force every filmmaker across the globe to make no-budget digital video movies, just like Dada and Surrealism didn't want the masses to change. It was/is an artistic movement, not a revolution. Every creative industry needs assembly line stuff to stay alive. That's fine, so long as it's not all there is. And I
think this article is calling for diversity, and that's a noble cause indeed.

Most independent games aren't really high on originality. There's some refreshing stuff like Serious Sam, but nobody's going to argue that it's progressive.

-jason
#13 by "FunkDrunk"
2001-02-20 18:01:52
jflavius@bellatlantic.com
#12 Jason mentioned
<quote> Most independent games aren't really high on originality. There's some refreshing stuff like Serious Sam, but nobody's going to argue that it's progressive. </quote>

I'd agree.  We've had tons of evolutionary games recently, but not many revolutionary games.  Most are refinements of existing gameplay mechanics.  Which isn't a bad thing, but sometimes it makes for repetitive gaming.

Funk
#14 by "Woo-Fu"
2001-02-20 18:14:41
random1@speakeasy.org random1-2.dsl.speakeasy.net
This sounds like the Gameboy Software Developers' Handbook....
#15 by "Reb"
2001-02-20 18:53:47
rebpizer@yahoo.com
I think the literary concept that there are only 7 types of stories kind of applies to this argument.  I don't know what the game equivalent of the seven stories is, (the seven genres, maybe?) but I think it's generally true that the most basic mechanics will more or less stay the same, only the details will change.  

I think this is okay, though, because to a certain extent, people want to know what to expect.  It gives them a frame of reference.

Reb
#16 by "Subcommandante Pedro"
2001-02-20 19:46:25
subcom@zombieworld.com http://www.planetblah.com
#4:

blah

I agree with JeffD.

Thank you for the pimpage, Foogla.  This topic has already been discussed in detail at planetblah, which, by the way IS THE #1 SUBCRAP OF ALL TIME!!!
#17 by "Apache"
2001-02-20 20:14:42
apache@voodooextreme.com http://www.voodooextreme.com
If you blow up heads, at least do it right! Play Soldier of Fortune. ;)
#18 by "Illbuddha"
2001-02-20 20:15:09
colin_kawakami@bossgame.com
http://hometown.aol.com/ewadams/index.html

Visit the author's homepage, take a good long look at his picture and ask, "Why the hell is anybody listening to this guy?"
#19 by "brennan"
2001-02-20 20:25:23
scott.gs@home.com
Scooped by Blah!  Thwap!

-brennan
#20 by "Subcommandante Pedro"
2001-02-20 22:15:15
subcom@zombieworld.com http://www.planetblah.com
Speaking of exploding heads, check out the latest blah.
#21 by "Quicken"
2001-02-21 00:04:03
geoffrey@access.com.au http://www.warmage.com/
Earnest Adams has written a few interesting articles on Gamasutra in the past. This isn't one of them. The Dogma 2001, like the Dogme 95, is trying to take away all the wonderful tricks that developers have become so used to. So what will a developer do if he can't make the most of directx8, if he can't have the player shooting things left and right to be rewarded by impressive deaths, if he can't make the game include many of the classic sci-fi and fantasy type characters. The point is to rule out all the things in games people take for granted and see what they can come up with. Could be an adventure game with an interesting story or a puzzle game most likely with these restrictions. But it's still a game. No room for technical innovation and no room for "tried and true" game basis. It does not push developers to make "better" games it's to push developers to make "innovative" games. After all, what does Quake 3 have that was not in the basic gameplay of doom deathmatch? What's wrong with playing a 2d role playing game where you run around a college and throw cafe lattes on people :) It'd be fun at least for a little while :)
#22 by "George Broussard"
2001-02-21 00:59:12
georgeb@3drealms.com
7. Violence is strictly limited to the disappearance or immobilization of destroyed units. Units which are damaged or destroyed shall be so indicated by symbolic, not representational, means. There shall be no blood, explosions, or injury or death animations.


We're out then.
#23 by "Desiato"
2001-02-21 01:43:26
desiato_hotblack@hotmail.com http://www.spew2.com/
I think at least one rule should be adhered to...

NO MORE DAMN CRATES.

Unless you're playing "Ultimate Warehouse Fighting" (tm), I just don't see what the hell the prolific crate usage is for.

Ack.

Unless you're actually in a setting where they make sense....(hopefully..)

Oh -- and please, whoever you are -- don't attempt liquids if your engine isn't up to the task.

*cough* Lithtech *cough*

I've said too much...


Desiato
#24 by "Glock"
2001-02-21 02:49:30
glock@avpnews.com http://www.avpnews.com
Another reason why morons shouldn't write articles.
#25 by "Speed"
2001-02-21 03:01:00
speed@crew.fragland.net http://fragland.net
no hardware acceleration, no first-person shooters, no pre-rendered cutscenes, no blood a-flyin', and so forth


Yea right. Back to the 80's !!!
#26 by "None-1a"
2001-02-21 03:33:44
none1a@home.com
RE #21

What's the point of creating an  innovative new game if it doesn't live up to the standerds we all have. Both Starship Titanic and Seniet where innovative games. Both had problems unrelated to the core design, or things with the core design that could have used more work. Both didn't turn out to be great games, and the idea they presented have been largly ignored.

No body is going to come back and use these bits of the designs of games that fail, even if they failed because of reasons not releated to their designs it looks that way to the people funding them.
#27 by "Jafd"
2001-02-21 03:35:52
JnoAspamFpleaseD@whatthefuck.com http://jafd.isfuckingbrilliant.com/
It is a rhetorical question. The article, I mean.

For those of you fresh out of junior, here's a definition; a rhetorical question is one in which a reaction is sought after, rather than an actual answer.

No more hardware acceleration? Bwa hahaha, yeah right. But that's not the point... think it over.
#28 by "Player11"
2001-02-21 04:50:31
thrawnage@bigpond.com
Liquids in lithtech:  Sure they looked like ass (see the jungle levels). But It was just a crappy texture. But when your inside them they feel just like any other liquid brush in any other engine (except build =] )

Dogma 2001: I think game dev's should take point of the *sub text* of the manifesto. Which is a return to focusing on Game mechanics and design. In other words dont tweek an exsiting game to a different theme or setting, insted warp and twist your design to something that becomes new and fresh like Metal Gear Solid, Theif and Dues Ex. These games stll share foundation idea's with the genre brothers but progress and develop apon the focus and design.  The common failing in the clones (SOF, EF, Alice, Fakk2 et all) is that they add *features* while leaving the core actions by the player untouched from the "father game" of the genre (eg Doom, Quake, Tomb Raider yadda).
#29 by "Quicken"
2001-02-21 05:59:31
geoffrey@access.com.au http://www.warmage.com/
Re: #26 ;)

The point is it _has_ to be innovative to be worth playing at all. I could play heaps of games that are not innovative just because it's more of the same old stuff I like. There's nothing wrong with that. Just like there's nothing wrong with enjoying the latest hollywood flik. But innovation is a good thing too.

It's funny. On one hand I palm it off as not one of the better articles from Earnest. On the other hand I'm defending the basic principle of the idea.

If you think a Dogma 2001 game is going to be fantastic (in all ways) then think again. That's not the point. It's a matter of where the real important work is and where the real concentration should be. Taken on a more simple level (without all the stupid rules) you could make some very very nice games though. Player11's comments are very good.
#30 by "Kayin"
2001-02-21 06:04:49
kayin@infinet.com
Pull out cliche characters, and make your own set of cliche characters.
Quit relying on tech. All games should spawn from two rocks and a stick. ^_^

I do agree all cinematics should be done in game dynamically by the engine. And the point made by wasting time on wiz bang death animations could be spent elsewhere is valid imo.

Although it would be interesting to see some collage up and comers hit a low budget and try some idea based on this for shareware...
#31 by "Kayin"
2001-02-21 06:12:58
kayin@infinet.com
FMV = overspiced food

I can begin playing a game, start to fall under the trance of the environment, start to believe i'm in an actual place...

mmmm pretty FMV sequence starts. ***POOF*** just like that the immersion is over. snap, crackle, popped. wtf, does it look like i have a bucket of popcorn sitting in my lap?

then i have to spend the next five or so minutes getting back into character, then suddenly another comes along... out goes the CD, back to the store with ye.

in game sequences actually feel right, and add to the overall plot in most cases. oni did this pretty well as far as i've played into it, imo. (scenes start with her biking in, getting out and walking inside, instead of some lame fmv and just plopping you at the level's start point)
#32 by "Anonymous"
2001-02-21 06:35:02
#22 by George Broussard
We're out then.

Thank God, I hope you break every damn rule of this dogma sh*t :)
Maybe except for the knights, elves and dwarf, this would be inapropriate and would pose no resistance to Duke anyway.
#33 by "None-1a"
2001-02-21 06:53:07
none1a@home.com
If you think a Dogma 2001 game is going to be fantastic (in all ways) then think again. That's not the point. It's a matter of where the real important work is and where the real concentration should be.


I'll agree with that, however those unimportant things also need to be taken care of. If that other stuff is done poorly or at lest not up to par with the current crop of games the inovation will be lost. When people judge the reasons the game didn't do well they'll point to the inovation not poor programing or problems is the other areas of design. Think back and try to find past games that used new idea in gameplay but that idea or other areas where done poorly, now try to think of a current game that uses the same idea. You will not come up with a whole lot.

I can begin playing a game, start to fall under the trance of the environment, start to believe i'm in an actual place...

mmmm pretty FMV sequence starts. ***POOF*** just like that the immersion is over. snap, crackle, popped. wtf, does it look like i have a bucket of popcorn sitting in my lap?


I see no reason why FMV can not give the same level of immersion as in game stuff. The problem is that many are done far better then the game itself. The same graphic style as the game would be no different then in in game sequnce
#34 by "BobJustBob"
2001-02-21 07:30:10
kevinakabob@mindspring.com
And the point made by wasting time on wiz bang death animations could be spent elsewhere is valid imo.


No way... Gibs and death sequences are a major part of the fun of some games. Ever played Dragon's Lair? And enjoyed it? Finding new ways to die was almost the point of that game. And all the bouncing gibs in UT MAKE the game. Imagine shooting someone and they just disappear or fall over. Nuh-uh.
#35 by "None-1a"
2001-02-21 08:07:39
none1a@home.com
Imagine shooting someone and they just disappear or fall over. Nuh-uh


They can't fall over. Falling over is reprsetational of death, rather the must stay frozen in the animation frame they where in at the time of death.
#36 by "Darkseid-[D!]"
2001-02-21 09:35:47
Darkseid@captured.com www.captured.com
Ladies, gentlemen, 3drealms, andy and sundry trolls...

may I present to you


Jeff Minter's - Llamatron, or Sensible Software's - WizBall


Oh yeah, I could have sworn that the 3DR media blackout said 'we're going to stop posting to boards til its done'... Not that Im objecting or anything ... since life just isnt the same without GeorgeB around

I mean, who else could we slander so outrageously and not get sued ;)


Ds
 
'Im twisted, Im Bitter, James Joyce is F*ckin my sister'
#37 by "Glock"
2001-02-21 09:53:49
glock@avpnews.com http://www.avpnews.com
Actually it is Charlie Wiederhold who said he wouldn't post in any forums.  After what that cunt Andy did, they won't be back to PlanetCrap.

Too bad we won't be seeing them here again.  The more developers the better.

But of course, Andy wanted a fucking story, so he burned them.

Thanks, Andy, you are a real fucking moron.
#38 by "Morn"
2001-02-21 10:24:02
morn@planetcrap.com http://www.planetcrap.com
BobJustBob in #34:
Imagine shooting someone and they just disappear or fall over. Nuh-uh.

Ever played the German Half-Life? You can throw grenades at scientists, and instead of exploding into a nasty mess of blood and gibs, they sit down and frown.

- Morn
#39 by "Creole Ned"
2001-02-21 10:33:06
cned@telus.net
Glock, did you not notice George Broussard posting in this very thread?

Not that he said a whole lot, mind you. :)
#40 by "Ozymandis"
2001-02-21 11:12:54
rcrisl1@gl.umbc.edu
there's very few PC titles that could be accepted.  but quite a few great console titles that would fit.

skies of arcadia i think would probably pass, or very nearly.
#41 by "Needle"
2001-02-21 11:56:18
mrklp@hotmail.com http://girlskissing.planetcrap.com
[#38] Morn,

Ever played the German Half-Life? You can throw grenades at scientists, and instead of exploding into a nasty mess of blood and gibs, they sit down and frown.


I heard the German version of HL had all it's enemy models replaced with robots.  That's insane.

What happened in Germany to make the government so strict on violence in games?  Did a bunch of gamers go out and slaughter people in the name of DOOM, and that's what prompted the laws regarding videogame violence?  Seriously, did something really horrible happen to make the government go this far on censoring violence?
#42 by "PiMuRho"
2001-02-21 13:05:36
#41:
Seriously, did something really horrible happen to make the government go this far on censoring violence?


Maybe WW2 and the holocaust? Just a guess.
#43 by "Rambar"
2001-02-21 14:30:16
Wish I wass more famaliar with German history :(
Question for Morn.  Was it illegal to praise the pre-WWI goverment in the post-WWI era?
#44 by "Foogla"
2001-02-21 14:40:39
Foogla@gmx.de
WW1? Or WW2?

Praising the pre-/during- WW2 govenrment after WW2 could very well lead to "Volksverhetzung" charges. Don't quote me on that, my brain hurts everytime Nazies get mentioned on the internet.
#45 by "Chella Kline"
2001-02-21 16:30:56
Chella's Manifesto

1) No more freaking pointy Elf shoe RPG, that crap is getting old and only hard core nerd boys get into it (People that have commented Bauldars Gate 2 is game of the year..... hang your head in shame)

2) No more Massive multiplayer online games. Not only should they not be created any longer, people that play them should be rounded up and shot.

3) Platform Jumps, one word........ DON'T. If you can't think of anything more creative then jumping from one platform to the next, get out of game design, get a boob job and pose for Playboy online.

4) The standard FPS paradigm is fucking dead. Be a man deal with it. I have been playing the Serious Sam Alpha, and while it's initially enjoyable, mowing down hoards of evil monsters gets boring after a while. I think Duke Nukem will be a dismal failure, and the guys at 3-D realms should quit the game biz and take up Bonsai (making little trees will help them get in touch with the harmony of the universe and crap like that).

5) Andy should be dragged in to a public place and flogged for my personal enjoyment.

Five little rules that not only would make games better, but the world better. Because the world can never really be happy, until Chella is happy.
#46 by "AshRain"
2001-02-21 19:57:45
ikhier@wish.nl http://wtf.couchcrew.com
I could easily design an all new game that has never been done before.

Problem is I would need a CPU at about 10 GHz just to run the AI. :P
#47 by "BruceR"
2001-02-21 23:47:38
bruce@avault.com
Writes Illbuddha: "Visit the author's homepage, take a good long look at his picture and ask, 'Why the hell is anybody listening to this guy?'"

Well, let's see:

*founded the Computer Game Developers Association
*created the Madden NFL line of games.
*writes one of the more insightful game industry columns around.

More to the point, why the hell should anyone listen to Illbuddha?
#48 by "Rod"
2001-06-11 05:13:38
rodjackson_x@hotmail.com
I think the Dogma 2001 article was refreshing. I'm a firm believer in having the gaming industry attempt innovation. Frankly, gaming does seem to be getting into a rut (yes, there are some innovative games out there, but how many? In fact, even though TheSims is sometimes called innovative, it does seem to be the natural extention of the 'sim' genre, and I fear the sequels based on it will begin to lose some of that 'freshness'.)

Don't get me wrong, there's a place for clones... I love fighters, particularly Marvel vs. Capcom 2, and that's nothing but a barely-innovative flash-enhanced derivative. But at the same time, I think I'd personally like to try to make a game or two that fit the Dogma 2001 guidelines. Not a whole company dedicated to that, mind you, just a game or two.

I think the core idea and a number of the specific guidelines have a lot of merit. I happen to be sick of games coming out requiring the latest and greatest system and graphics card... I'm one of the millions who just wants a good game that doesn't have high system requirements. Frankly, if it just runs in VGA on a Pentium, I can usually be satisfied.
#49 by "Rod"
2001-06-11 05:13:45
rodjackson_x@hotmail.com
I think the Dogma 2001 article was refreshing. I'm a firm believer in having the gaming industry attempt innovation. Frankly, gaming does seem to be getting into a rut (yes, there are some innovative games out there, but how many? In fact, even though TheSims is sometimes called innovative, it does seem to be the natural extention of the 'sim' genre, and I fear the sequels based on it will begin to lose some of that 'freshness'.)

Don't get me wrong, there's a place for clones... I love fighters, particularly Marvel vs. Capcom 2, and that's nothing but a barely-innovative flash-enhanced derivative. But at the same time, I think I'd personally like to try to make a game or two that fit the Dogma 2001 guidelines. Not a whole company dedicated to that, mind you, just a game or two.

I think the core idea and a number of the specific guidelines have a lot of merit. I happen to be sick of games coming out requiring the latest and greatest system and graphics card... I'm one of the millions who just wants a good game that doesn't have high system requirements. Frankly, if it just runs in VGA on a Pentium, I can usually be satisfied.
#50 by "Rod"
2001-06-11 05:14:06
rodjackson_x@hotmail.com
I think the Dogma 2001 article was refreshing. I'm a firm believer in having the gaming industry attempt innovation. Frankly, gaming does seem to be getting into a rut (yes, there are some innovative games out there, but how many? In fact, even though TheSims is sometimes called innovative, it does seem to be the natural extention of the 'sim' genre, and I fear the sequels based on it will begin to lose some of that 'freshness'.)

Don't get me wrong, there's a place for clones... I love fighters, particularly Marvel vs. Capcom 2, and that's nothing but a barely-innovative flash-enhanced derivative. But at the same time, I think I'd personally like to try to make a game or two that fit the Dogma 2001 guidelines. Not a whole company dedicated to that, mind you, just a game or two.

I think the core idea and a number of the specific guidelines have a lot of merit. I happen to be sick of games coming out requiring the latest and greatest system and graphics card... I'm one of the millions who just wants a good game that doesn't have high system requirements. Frankly, if it just runs in VGA on a Pentium, I can usually be satisfied.
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Gamasutra's "Dogma 2001": No more exploding heads?!

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]