this is why we need the equivalent of 19th-20th century art movements in games, so that we can have a coherent faction of designers who say: "it is imperative that we confuse the player" and then the rest of the field reacts to how that feels like it alters the fabric of the medium.
You must log in to comment.
in reply to @mogwai-poet's post:
honestly it really helped unblock my game dev brain this month to play a game that was just remorselessly indifferent to explaining itself
Rain World - if you’re unfamiliar it’s a survival-platformer with a fairly intricate ecosystem, and the game is willing to explain some of the platforming mechanics and none of the motivations, capabilities, or weaknesses of the many other critters you encounter
So it’s a lot of meeting a new thing and going “which of us is food? how can you help me? how can I get past you?” And every time I’ve caved and looked up info about a creature the possibility space is always much, much bigger than I would have imagined.
Ah I bounced off of Rain World early, maybe I should try it again
I don’t blame you, it’s feverishly difficult
It’s definitely rearranging the insides of my brain in ways I hope are good but it’s also not an easy thing to recommend
I was very confused due to glittermitten grove's conversation mechanics and I think figuring it out was what made it so memorable
Glittermitten Grove was a surprise and delight because it was basically sold as "Frog Fractions 2's camouflage dust jacket" and it turned out to be a DAMN SOLID GAME on its own merits
...GODDAMMIT, I NEED TO FINISH FROG FRACTIONS 2 SOMETIME
A solid 1/5 of the time playing games I'm stoned anyway and not fully paying attention so yeah this tracks.
in reply to @vectorpoem's post:
Huh. I guess that's kinda what a good game jam does right, or like that monthly game dev collective thing that was short lived. What if we all focused on this weird idea for a bit.
I think about the arcane kids manifesto a lot