I, Prototype
This post is about what I think of the negative backlash (check the comments) that some well-known experiments usually produce…
The problem with the word prototype is that it compels common sense to imply that prototypes are an antechamber for a production-class version of a game. Most of the time this is the case, but not all prototypes have to be this way.
What if the intent is just to put a small idea to test? Do you need to go through the grind of developing a well-rounded game just to prove that the idea was worthwhile?
That’s why there are proof-of-concept prototypes. Those are meant to try out an idea that might not even be a complete game mechanic, and it doesn’t matter if they are successful or not. Their purpose is to give something new to think about, which is quite an achievement even if only other designers find it useful.
It’s very bad that we usually think all prototypes are just shitty precursors of a sellable game, or worse yet, obliged to entertain gamers. Because we need more of these proof-of-concept prototypes and respect them for what they are for: creating new worlds out of wacky ideas.
Maybe we should stop calling these “prototypes”? Can you think up a better term?
4 Comments so far
Leave a comment
Joystiq and similar sites are havens for jerk-offs, I wouldn’t take their comments too seriously. I think the cultural problems you’re citing go much deeper than just the dissemination of prototypes. Maybe “experiments” is a better term? Simple, but effective.
By Patrick on April 12
Since every idea on a game designer’s head is a potential game, what about calling these prototypes “potential games”?
By Egar on April 12
Patrick:
Yes, the deeper problem is the current absence of the concept of “experiment” in developers. Which is much worse than a 17 years old complaining about how Guitar Hero is much better than The Marriage. You would be surprised by how many devs believe that you make prototypes because you want to storm the market with something new instead of just trying a concept.
Egar:
“Potential games” is not short or catchy enough :).
Seriously, coming up with a proper term is not that critical…it was more of a mindgame to get you thinking about the differences between a prototype of a game and an experiment implementation.
By Daniel Benmergui on April 12
Just leave the name prototype in there, but change your audience… gamers are gamers, they just want to play with something entertaining, they don’t give a rat’s ass about your crusade of experiment with something that you don’t even know for sure if it’s going to become a full game or not.
The problem comes when a new audience -this time composed by game designers- does not understand the purpose of your creation… if that’s the case, you just painted a Campbell’s tomato can.
By Egar on April 13
Leave a comment