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

51–60 of 127 posts

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#51

Post by hajimemash »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #23
ev1 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From 2018 case (just google "riot farting" honestly): https://html2-f.scribdassets.com/6454fy6neo6mwj3w/images/5-7... > Why don't game engineers demand better? Start a company with decent work hours and comp and refuse to work elsewhere. Some do! I would imagine many indie game companies are not like this. There's kind of a split, where you have "strictly-business" companies - many Asian MMORPG publishers that have a…

> You can kind of see how this playerbase would differ from, say, the usual singleplayer or co-op indie or puzzle game. Oh yes. I must say, these days I hate playing multiplayer game modes with leaderboards attached. Relevant to this thread: I used to play Heroes of the Storm (Blizzard's LoL clone) causally with friends. Then one day a colleague dragged me into his team, full of people dozens of levels above me (and…

It's not really your fault. Pro gamers have enough experience to be able to know that dragging a noob into an expert-level match is going to be a bad outcome.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#52

Post by astrobe_ »

mooman219 wrote: post #18

(Riot's less than stellar history aside) I see these takes on game design a lot, and they're interesting to see because everyone takes their own stance on how to construct a fun game from distinct smaller concepts. Yahtzee’s Dev Diary [0] talks a lot about loops (And I give it a watch recommendation), while at your average GDC talk you hear about the concept of pillars [1] and their role in shaping games. I'm interes…

https://www.twitch.tv/irdc_usa

This is quite old and focused on rogue-likes, but it might meet your request. Somehow.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#53

Post by danso »

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 suppose "competent" encompasses a limitless variety of accomplishments, including both reliable upkeep of a massively popular real-time multiplayer game and creating+maintaining a massively popular competitive game's balance and freshness. I reflexively associate it with technical performance, like John Carmack at iD and Naughty Dog now.

(Well, and back in the day – this writeup of Crash Bandicoot by Naughty Dog's first employee is a classic: https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DaveBaggett/20131031/203788/...)

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#54

Post by Aerroon »

MaximumMadness wrote: post #44

Of all the non-FAANG gaming companies Riot is the one that most closely operates like a tech giant to me (with the exception of maybe Epic Games) They have an incredibly robust M&A division, have mastered land + expand with their esports, are putting down roots in pretty much every major gaming category, and have modern monetization practices down to a tee. Excluding the clearly egregious cultural issues, I would be…

>I would be fairly confident in betting on Riot in the long term

Tencent already did that more than 10 years ago. I wonder how they pick who to invest into, because it seems that in the gaming space they have their hand in almost everything successful. And how come others aren't doing the same?

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#55

Post by meheleventyone »

munificent wrote: post #43

Game design (whether computer or even board games) is a valuable topic to learn even if you never make a real game. If you make any kind of thing that people use, learning a little about how to think like a game designer can help you make things that are more rewarding and pleasant to use. One way to think of videogames is that they are useless software . Imagine a word processor that couldn't save or print files. Or…

I take serious issue with the description of games as useless. They don’t do anything in the same way as reading a book doesn’t do anything. Or playing chess doesn’t do anything. You absolutely get something tangible in return. Whether it’s a new perspective, new friends or utter humiliation.

The idea we should capture the way games build tangible experiences and apply them to “useful software” is to misunderstand both what makes games useful and software that achieves a task. Gamification is swimming in the shallow end of game design. Swimming in the deeper end is beyond what most productive software should be doing design wise. The goals are different, the results are different and more importantly building software that fuses games and learning is different than either.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#56

Post by Aerroon »

prerok wrote: post #46
TeMPOraL wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can kind of see how this playerbase would differ from, say, the usual singleplayer or co-op indie or puzzle game. Oh yes. I must say, these days I hate playing multiplayer game modes with leaderboards attached. Relevant to this thread: I used to play Heroes of the Storm (Blizzard's LoL clone) causally with friends. Then one day a colleague dragged me into his team, full of people dozens of levels above me (and…

Well, the history is a bit different. LoL was created as a clone from Dota (Defense of the Ancients) mod for Warcraft 3. So, DOTA 2 is a continuation of that story and Blizzard basically recreated the mod into a standalone game and called it DOTA 2. I do agree with the sentiment though. The community is definitively not n00b friendly and I gave up soon as well :S

The community has probably never been noob friendly. A common meme shared in the Dota 1 days (before LoL and Heroes of Newerth) was "Welcome to DOTA, you suck."

Also, I believe you meant Valve made Dota 2.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#57

Post by DreamOther »

Their MMR system has changed over the years to maximize revenue at the expense of player pain. They force the above-average player to play 100s of games climb to rank where they "belong" per season, gradually increasing the amount of time required to be absolutely absurd. Combine that with their lack of care for the toxicity in their player base and you have one hot stinky mess, and I wouldn't put a high schooler anywhere near their core game design values. Direct reflection of their (bad) company culture.

In the micro, fun and well designed gameplay (Valorant too!). In the macro, their games are a terrible slog rooted in addiction science. All to maximize revenue from rolling skin and champion releases. Every single champion is released overpowered to add a temporary boost in play time and revenue. We can do better.

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#58

Post by [deleted] »

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #32
tebruno99 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#59

Post by [deleted] »

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #32
tebruno99 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]

Re: Game Design Curriculum

#60

Post by hombre_fatal »

prerok wrote: post #38
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…

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. Thi…

Meanwhile, League of Legends has been the most watched game on Twitch consistently for years, only rivaled by the some-odd temporary new release and Fortnite.

It's not that complicated. The champions walk around and shoot spells at each other.

Post reply on HN