thread: 2012-02-11 : 3 Problems

On 2012-02-12, Alex Abate Biral wrote:

@Jeff Russell, @Jake Richmond

Thanks for the replies, and I am really sorry if I appeared confrontational in my post. The question I asked is real. I actually don't know whether making your game reach a broader audience really involves.

On one hand, there is what I said about AW and Murderous Ghosts. In fact, I don't need to look far to see a game that isn't "for me", Poison'd fills those shoes very well. And I really appreciate Poison'd. Even though it is a game I probably won't ever play, I can see why (or at least part of it) Vincent is so proud of that game. So that seems to support the idea games that more "powerful" games are less "appealing".

On the other hand, though, removing counterproductive procedures of play, if I understand the term right, didn't make games more "watered down". If anything, it did the opposite. It helped games focus on what is awesome about them.

So, that is what I am wondering about, if making games that reach out for a bigger number of people really implies making games that are "shallower". I also wonder about a few other related things. For example, if that relation is true, wouldn't people outside the small white spot wouldn't prefer games with similarly small white spots homed at them, instead of all inclusive games. And would games that are even "deeper" necessarily be more niche?


This makes...
short response
optional explanation (be brief!):

if you're human, not a spambot, type "human":