Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Game Design Curriculum

riotgames.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 127 posts

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#31

Post by Trasmatta »

HenryBemis wrote: post #24
Trasmatta wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a demand problem, there's a huge number of young engineers who desperately want to get into games. They get burnt out after a few years and replaced with new ones. That being said, things are slowly starting to change, and employees of game studios are starting to demand better. It's still bad in most places, but the discussion is happening.

There is a massive gaming industry in Poland. From discussions with engineers/Devs/designers in that field, they are overworked, management doesn't know what they want, objectives/deliverables/requirements change on the fly (while schedule/cost stays the same). Then fast-tracking happens (no crashing - no extra funds). For most of the issues they made me believe that it's a halo effect. People that were great designe…

That sounds about the same as what I've heard from game developers I've talked to in the States as well.

Games are massively difficult to develop, and because of that there's this idea that insane crunch is inevitable for all projects. But every single story I've heard is that project management for just about every game is horrible, even in comparison to badly managed software in general.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#32

Post by read_if_gay_ »

tebruno99 wrote: post #8
read_if_gay_ wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why has it become so popular recently to shit on something because of who made it? Is this not just a poor ad hominem?

In this case because they are positioned to become a form of role model of these students. Who will eventually find out that their favorite company can be horrible to negligible consequence.

You could justify almost any such attack like this. Can you not just appreciate what you’re given here for free, for once? The effort people have put into this? Just imagine pouring months into something like this and getting your post as a thanks.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#33

Post by FreezerburnV »

abledon wrote: post #22
tester756 wrote: post #15

I must say that they're probably the most competent studio on the market LoL is probably the only game that I play (maybe once a year I decide to spend up to 50h over some peroid on one title like GTA V or something) for years and it almost always feels "fresh" and very competitive.

LoL is also an amazing spectator sport, the format is so fun to watch. OverWatch/CS-GO/Valorant/Fortnite etc... the FPS aspect is a harder to follow especially for people with slower eye movement. Lol on the other hand, its like watching Soccer/Golf/Football except the players also have magic/hi-tech abilities. The "depth" of the strategy is also sooo much more than an FPS. flex picks, lane swaps, lane freezing , met…

    The "depth" of the strategy is also sooo much more than an FPS
You only think that because you know more about LoL. As someone very into Overwatch, it's an absurdly complicated game where you only know about the complexity once you learn about it. After having learned a lot more about the game, I can look at high-level play and "see" a lot more of the things they're doing due to the level of complexity of the game, just like you can see that same stuff watching LoL.

At a high level, Overwatch is complicated because it effectively combines MOBA elements with FPS elements. It's not really a straight FPS, and the higher skill you get the more you have to pay attention to the MOBA elements in order to do well. As an example: Zarya is a tank whose entire ability kit (sans ultimate) is built around using an ability on herself and a teammate (on different cooldowns) to protect them from damage/negative effects for 2 seconds at a time. This ability can be destroyed if 200 damage is done to the player it's affecting, and Zarya gains increased damage if damage is done to this ability up to a cap. It sounds simple, but players who have mastered Zarya are ones who know _when_ to use these two abilities, which order, etc. which has a lot to do with the current state of the game. Bad Zarya players use both abilities instantly and simultaneously the second they see the opponent. It's all about timing abilities... which sounds a lot like playing a MOBA. But you also have to be good at aim and master the two firing modes she has, among the many, many other things to pay attention to during gameplay.

I don't whether LoL or Overwatch has more "depth", but they both have a lot of it.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#34

Post by abdullahkhalids »

FreezerburnV wrote: post #33
abledon wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LoL is also an amazing spectator sport, the format is so fun to watch. OverWatch/CS-GO/Valorant/Fortnite etc... the FPS aspect is a harder to follow especially for people with slower eye movement. Lol on the other hand, its like watching Soccer/Golf/Football except the players also have magic/hi-tech abilities. The "depth" of the strategy is also sooo much more than an FPS. flex picks, lane swaps, lane freezing , met…

The "depth" of the strategy is also sooo much more than an FPS You only think that because you know more about LoL. As someone very into Overwatch, it's an absurdly complicated game where you only know about the complexity once you learn about it. After having learned a lot more about the game, I can look at high-level play and "see" a lot more of the things they're doing due to the level of complexity of the game, j…

Let me start a flamewar by informing you both that Dota 2 exists, and has much more complicated spells. And hence more depth. At least that's what people who have played both LoL and Dota 2 say.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#35

Post by ihuman »

Animats wrote: post #9

They put a PowerPoint into a PDF into a scrollable window too small to display a full slide. Ouch. The course itself is interesting, in that it's not a programming course at all. It's about what makes a game fun. Download the PDF and look at page 6, which has the useful info.

There's a download link above the PDF view that allows you to view/download the PDF directly

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#36

Post by debaserab2 »

Trasmatta wrote: post #16
tester756 wrote: post #15

I must say that they're probably the most competent studio on the market LoL is probably the only game that I play (maybe once a year I decide to spend up to 50h over some peroid on one title like GTA V or something) for years and it almost always feels "fresh" and very competitive.

I think there's lots of studios just as competent or more competent than Riot. They've made so few games, it's hard to compare them to other studios in that way.

I agree. I do not like Riot's "startup" approach to game design, where gameplay elements are plucked from the most popular titles on the market. The games have never felt innovative to me, they just seem like they took from everyone else and then focused on iteration so much that it gives the features and gameplay a level of polish that a lot of games don't get (especially from a esports vantage point). The art style also feels so accessible to me that it lacks a certain soul that defines a good game.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#37

Post by Jare »

madrox wrote: post #21

Despite thinking Riot has excellent insight into competitive game development, I'm pretty cynical about their recent wave of sharing since it wreaks of image repair. It doesn't matter what there is to learn from Riot if the culture is poisonous, and I don't believe it's changed much since the last wave of allegations. It's a shame, since this looks pretty substantive, but I'd rather learn this elsewhere.

They have held an extremely interesting tech blog for years, but it makes sense that they would talk more about design only after they had more than one game on the market.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#38

Post by prerok »

abledon wrote: post #22
tester756 wrote: post #15

I must say that they're probably the most competent studio on the market LoL is probably the only game that I play (maybe once a year I decide to spend up to 50h over some peroid on one title like GTA V or something) for years and it almost always feels "fresh" and very competitive.

LoL is also an amazing spectator sport, the format is so fun to watch. OverWatch/CS-GO/Valorant/Fortnite etc... the FPS aspect is a harder to follow especially for people with slower eye movement. Lol on the other hand, its like watching Soccer/Golf/Football except the players also have magic/hi-tech abilities. The "depth" of the strategy is also sooo much more than an FPS. flex picks, lane swaps, lane freezing , met…

I don't agree. While I played LoL for a while (never competitive level though), it's still not fun to watch any competitive game.

Comparing these games to soccer is impossible. Every champion has unique abilities uncomparable to other champion's. If you have no knowledge about what they are doing (or need to be doing) you are just out of depth.

The games are just too fast and way too specific for casual watchers. This is ok but this kind of gaming will never get even near of soccer in spectator interest.

Edit: typo

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#39

Post by jimbob45 »

IMHO the biggest innovation Riot brought to the industry was player outreach. They were the first to heavily (30+ posts per day across multiple devs) interact with their player base. Even better, their patch notes were the first to have paragraphs explaining each change. Even better, they stuck to a bi-weekly patch cycle religiously, unlike Blizzard, who had to be begged to put out a patch every six months.

To players who actually played SC2 and LoL circa 2011, it wasn’t a surprise when LoL became the premiere e-sport and SC2 withered away.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#40

Post by colinmhayes »

young_unixer wrote: post #28
tester756 wrote: post #15

I must say that they're probably the most competent studio on the market LoL is probably the only game that I play (maybe once a year I decide to spend up to 50h over some peroid on one title like GTA V or something) for years and it almost always feels "fresh" and very competitive.

I hate that they release new champions so often. My incentive to play is climbing the ranked ladder and, like you, I play in bursts separated by months, but each time I start playing again there are like 5 new champions whose abilities I don't know or understand, which keeps me at a disadvantaged position. I don't have time to study all the new champs abilities. I think their high champion-release rate drives the cas…

They release like 5 champions a year, most of them in late summer and late fall. Most months there are no new champions.
Post reply on HN