Like any art, computer games
same name can
different directors
sculpture,
craftsmanship level
+++ edit
there was a lot moi had said, yeah
Computer games, being an art form, takes on the
Under two different dictors' supervisions, one
Game design is a task and a design work which like all art-work requires tremendous talent.
Greater mastery yields triple times greater results.
Hitting and having surpassed the limit of qualification leads forth the candidate to tremendous results.
Game design indeed is much mastery dependent.
If a game doesn't work out to expectation, it has everything to do with the content, and little wrong with the genres. Propositions and often heard rhetorics such as oh so and so genre is no good, or so and so category of games is declining, rests on empty clouds. The unsuccess and missing excellence of those games are tracable to those particular games themselves instead.
Skill of a director proportions to the outcome of the work.
Veterancy, experience, mastery matters, this is the trinity force, the determinant factor of a game.
Quality scales with high talent exponentially.
The greatest a visionary's talent is the further greater the project's final result.
It's a craft, than a chore.
Two different games can be labelled the same name, while so the quality of the game goes unmoved.
The feel, overall quality of the game will depend on the content itself, which directly correlates with the mastery level and craftsmanship of the master chief, like directors of a movie.
Like movie directors, the central game development (design) overseer determine the fate of this project's creation.
Same project under two different directors' supervision, results in different outcome of the plant and creature being raised.
A game is more than artistic entity, it is a living creature - it has a soul, a mind of its own, preferences and desires. Nurcher thy pikachu and he will grow to be a good lad.
Might as well be the same project, but under
a great design master's supervision, an legendary
icon will emerge. The game would become
a cultural identity card, affixed in association
with the lineage, culture onto the timeline of
a given period and so t'euo grace.
A game, is a cultural thing.
It's an artistic ration, it's like a sculpture.
There is room for epicness, that's what games are for.
Games have the capacity to become cultral icons, a legendary fable, a feat of strength, a one-of-a-kind cultural achievement. Those will be things to remember by.
New game concepts are under creation as we speak.
Craftsmanship in this trade pays off.
Having artistic talent and values spells glory and (sends) calling to thy name.
Real chief creators of games bond with their games.
The ones who could perform grand master mastery on game design arrived to this destiny out of perhaps pre-planning. The games called for their names.
Folks who are most fit to be doing game design were placed by the heavens to this chosen road.
A marvelous creation would be remembered for centuries and onward, like poker and chess.
Every very good game sticks to the reality and fantasy at sametime, in a intrinsic way. Such games come by single counts, rare per month, seldom by year, common per decade.
All games, being art creations they are, in various degrees reflect the current thinkings as well as the underlying desires of many.
Real epic games never go out-dated. They simply re-incarnate or shapeshift to another one that's slightly more closer to the new developments, whether social, cultural or scientific, dynamic or static and so on.
Every marvelous game ties closely to the unchanging fundamental rules of the nature. Characters live and dissapate, dramas rise and fall, but the sun and the principles of life remains constant and are ongoing.
