Re: Re: Games Categories

On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 12:41:56PM -0400, Ben Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 16:17 +0100, Frank S. Thomas wrote:
> >   ActionGame    - An action game
> >   AdventureGame - Adventure style game
<snip...>
> >   KidsGame      - A game for kids
> 
> All of the above are attributes specifically applicable to games
> *except* "Kids".
> 
<snip>


I whole-heartedly agree.  "Kids" would be a categorization _outside_ this.
For example, "Go Fish" would be a Card Game, but also suitable for Kids.
Whereas "Poker" would probably be too complicated.


Additionally, I don't quite understand what an "Arcade" game is.
Are there not sports games, adventure games, action games and simulations
in the video arcade?

I understand that people often use this to describe some of the indescribable
games of yesteryear (like "Pac-Man"... it's not really a /maze/ game, is it?),
but in the end you end up lumping a lot of unrelated games together.
(Asteroids is an action space game, and nothing like Pac-Man.)

Like with "Kids," I suggest that this might be more useful as an
'encompassing' category, if people insist on keeping it.  Puzzle games,
for example -- there are games like Sokoban and Atomix, and then there are
fast-action puzzle games that were found in the arcades, like Tetris, Klax
and Columns.

I imagine there's a push and pull between what people like me consider
"the right way of doing it", and what the end users expect.
("Why is there no 'arcade' games?  I want to play a Pac-Man clone!")
That's why it having multiple categories would be helpful. :)

Note: I just write games, I'm not a packager or Debian Developer or
anything. :)


-- 
-bill!                                    Tux Paint 2006 wall calendar,
[email protected]                CDROM, bumper sticker & apparel
http://www.newbreedsoftware.com/       http://www.cafepress.com/newbreedsw