Ok, so why is so hard for the gaming industry to have actual creativity at making non violent games?

not sure, my goal is to make a standart videogame that doesn't relly on violence.

sounds pretty original I think, like a pokemon JRPG recettear roguelike.

Learn to speak english first you complete failure. And the fact that you have to name other video games makes it anything other than "original".

I'm not copying those games I mention them so you can have an idea of what to expect.

Super Meat Boy doesn't involve enemies IIRC

Video games are very good at simulating spaces and physical interactions. Non-physical concepts, such as having a conversation, have to be abstracted. If you want to make something non-violent consider other activities that involve physical movement in a space. Vehicle sims are pretty neato.

Or don't. Abstraction isn't a bad thing.

involves getting killed by traps.

basically having an HP variable.

You want to make something "original". Learn what words mean. The fact you're making a roguelike, a genre that is 40 years old, is the least original thing you could do. It being violent or not means nothing to anyone other than your narcissistic ass.

original doesn't mean 100% new.

original usually is 80% old with 20% innovation.

being 100% new usually is crappy and only schizos can do it.
humans can't create from the vacuum.

And next you'll force out walking sims because there are no gameplay. Violence isn't bad per se, it just needs proper context and "pacing".

I didn't say there were bad.

I also made a simple walking simulator for deafblind people using only the gamepad.

Alright well if you can't die as a failure state, all that leaves is like Harvest Moon, racing games, and puzzle games, which you already discounted. I don't know what type of game you can possibly have that doesn't fit your ridiculous criteria since platformers and action games have to have death as a failure state of some sort. Otherwise there is no game.

that what I am trying to ask, since I think is possible to make a challenging game, an interesting one without a HP bar or being killed.

The other day I was thinking about some stealth game about being a war nurse.

And your game is 0% new. You couldn't even come up with a single, unique aspect.
Catching shit, done hundreds of times
NonCombat but it's actually abstract combat, see above
Farming, see above
Sounds like fucking Animal Crossing to me, faggot, oh but there are dungeons, so I guess it's Rune Factory without the combat.

Sit your ass down and make that game before you start talking any shit, because right now, it sounds like fucking clown shoes.

Attached: 1470352727391.gif (360x360, 1.97M)

I was asking for opinions.

you seem to have anger issues.

You didn't ask for shit, you came here proclaiming that the book industry is shit and uncreative and that you wrote "what I did last summer vacation".
This is the second thread I've seen from you self-fellating about "muh non violence games" while providing fuck all yourself other than a slight lack of oxygen in the room due to your mouthbreathing.
Instead of wasting your time philosophizing in broken english about "muh violence", create something that is actually worth talking about.

Attached: 1470348299771.jpg (777x759, 271K)

youtube.com/watch?v=9VlY-3V63yI

how bout a game about enviromental landscaping?

????

you need a failure state to drive the player towards a goal, if they can't fail then why bother trying, there's no challenge. so if HP/death is not your failure mode, then it has to be something like..

>speed
timed laps, countdowns for a task to be completed, competing on a leaderboard
>dexterity/agility
adventure games with platforming, hitting precise targets with mouseclicks, physics puzzles
>balancing
citybuilding games, theme park games, relaxing creator-mode type things where you have to keep track of inputs and outputs to maintain a steady growth within an economic system
>story
persona games, rpgs, things where the "bad" ending is the motivator for trying to achieve the "good" ending

thing is there's tons of examples but you just think you're really original and full of ideas, in actual fact you're just coming up with stuff that's already been done in other ways.

You mean a fucking level editor? One of the basic things that ships with every engine?

but how is it a game? it's just a 3d engine unless you're motivating the player somehow. maybe it's like a theme park game and they have to attract visitors and stay in budget, maybe it's a puzzle and they have to fit the park pieces together in a certain way...these are the gamemodes that fundamentally create the game, your ideas about landscaping or farming or nurses are just the skin on top.

What are Populous, Black and White, From Dust?

yeah, but why do we need a failure state?

there's plenty of human activities that don't involve a failure state, and most of them are still fun.

music, drawing, art, carpentry, masonry, woodmaking, sculpting, writing, gardening, cooking.

Most IRL hobbies lack a failure state, so I'm a bit skeptical about you need a failure state.

maybe, but I was thinking more like mixing stuff from a pokemon garden with minecraft.

I think it comes down to having a motivation and having a challenging force.
Maybe the challenging force are the foreign invader species that prey on the native species.

Maybe you don't kill the foreign species but capture and ship them to other places.

>music, drawing, art, carpentry, masonry, woodmaking, sculpting, writing, gardening, cooking.
These all have a failure state.
Fucking up in a concert.
Having ugly scribbles.
Furniture you make falls apart.
Brick wall you make collapses.
Statue crumbles during the art show.
Book bombs.
Weeds overrun flowerbed and yard.
You make something inedible.

games with death and violence as a primary motivator...populous literally involves bringing firestorms and dragons down on your enemy to win. just because they have landscape modding as a tactic doesn't make them gardening sims.

yeah, but you don't die or something particularly bad happen to you.

Again, the failure state could be you make a bad concert, but you wont get a game over.
Maybe a number of bad concerts could lower your status in the game but you don't necesarelly get a game over, maybe a bad ending, but dunno, that's what I think.

Maybe What I am trying to say is that the challenge in games could be more than simply overcomming hordes of minions you need to harm.

>yeah, but why do we need a failure state?

because otherwise people won't find the game compelling. it's basic human psyche. even passive games like city sims or minecraft or even viridi involve some kind of failure and success mechanic (city burns/you lose money/enemy attacks; monsters kill you, you die and lose your stuff; your plants die from neglect)

i'd be honestly interested to hear of a single successful game which doesn't have any kind of success/failure mechanic. I have one on my phone called pocket build and it's basically what you're describing but without any kind of incentive to progress it's kind of boring to play sometimes.

> challenge in games could be more than simply overcomming hordes of minions you need to harm.
Now you beginning to make sence.
youtube.com/watch?v=5ZM2jXyvGOc

Crusader Kings, for example. There is also a puzzle-style failure state when you just can't progress in the level.

>Maybe What I am trying to say is that the challenge in games could be more than simply overcomming hordes of minions you need to harm.
You mean like the dozen+ genres that were posted above that you handwaved away?

you're missing the point entirely

>hey guys what's a game without death/violence
>well user there are lots
>yeah but not those, something like a gardening game with no HP bar or being killed
>but every game needs success/failure mechanics, even a garden sim will have those, even if it's not death, even real life has success and failure
>yeah but in real life you don't die

it seems like you're looking for citybuilding games user...there's rarely a game over unless you really fucked up, a failure state would be having an unsuccessful city or having famine or fire break out and those are always solvable issues so that you end up with a successful outcome if you put in the work

no, you're getting wrong.

I mean a failure state that involves conflict or getting killed.

I didn't really mean no conflict.
I mean being a bit more creative than trying to solve everything using violence.
There's plenty of other as interesting challenges to overcome that doesn't deal with violence.

How bout self mastery and overcoming oneself?

That could an interesting non violent game, being a white mage/healer/paladin where the challenge is to heal the most people rather than kill enemies.

play some of them life simulator games dude, sims, harvest moon, animal crossing
there is million stuff like that out there

>Crusader Kings
Well I never played it but it says it's a grand strategy. So it's just another genre that we already mentioned. There's tons of games where you can have interesting gameplay without violence. Not to mention this game is literally about one of the most violent periods in history.

I think there's nothing wrong with making even newer genres and being creative if we move a bit away from using violence as the only solution of conflict in games.

How bout a JRPG about making bread and the failure condition is having your bakery close?

>self mastery and overcoming oneself

elaborate
because in a game context that just means getting better at whatever task the game has given you
so what's the task?

By healing people you are killing diseases

sounds like cooking mama

It is an example of game without determined failure state, if you are consent with the living conditions of your land, you are successful.

>How bout a JRPG about making bread and the failure condition is having your bakery close?
How is that not "conflict"? How is it a RPG in the first place?

>Ok, so why is so hard for the gaming industry to have actual creativity at making non violent games?
because they have to justify their insane budgets spent on marketing, cutscenes, cutting edge graphics, and presentation. they offset these costs by making gems in the most popular genres, and then use pay to win and lootbox tactics to make sure they always make a huge profit. you're some guy and would be happy if you made 90,000 dollars in one shot with your game. 90,000 dollars doesn't cover 2 employees in a AAA studio. your game's scope is also microscopic compared to the logistical monstrosities that are AAA open worlds. you want to make a game out of passion and fun, they want all the money.

so how are we having this discussion
>guys give me examples of games without a simple death/loss mechanic
>RTS, racing, sims, puzzles
>NO NOT THOSE THEY DON'T COUNT

the other day I was thinking about a fighting game focused only on making combos, but it was like a practice mode.

My idea was meant to be a game for freestyle combo creation.

That could be neat for a niche market.
Maybe there's a score bar based on dificulty of combos.

Sounds like and idea I want to explore.
I also want to make a sort of metal gear game where your a war nurse and have to help your team squad survives the missions, but you can't shoot enemies.

There's animes about bakeries and they seem to do fine.
Why a JRPG about gathering spices and other ingredients from the dungeon, while having to have a small farm to gather the wheat while you also have to sell enough bread to pay the landlord rent.

How is that not as exciting as another FF mashing buttons?

>Why a JRPG about gathering spices and other ingredients from the dungeon
What would you do in the dungeon?

>How is that not as exciting as another FF mashing buttons?
Your game plays without pressing buttons?

>war nurse and have to help your team squad survives the missions, but you can't shoot enemies.
a stealth game? One of the genres you dismissed?

Attached: 1351797943741.png (555x407, 28K)

We didn't say your ideas weren't exciting, we just said they aren't particularly original.

Don't talk for me, I'm saying they're not exciting.

Because combat is fun and lets you experience the result of your work in the game in the form of kicking ass.
This is why Rune Factory is more fun than Harvest Moon. All that cooking and crafting suddenly becomes a lot more fun when you use the items to kick more ass in dungeons.

let's settle that OP is both boring and unoriginal and his ideas are shit and he should feel bad

well, gathering resources, the dungeon could be about managing resources while having enough to not get lost and having enough food and water to not faint.
similar to how RE3 basically works without zombies.

The challenge could be finishing the dungeon in a time limit or have enough water, or scavenging enough food, or maybe trying to find a rare items who only comes under rare conditions.

Just be creative.

I'm just discussing this topic, since I care about non violent games.

but I am sure we can use the combat mechanics without being forced to kill and be killed.

Don't tell me to be creative when you come around with half-baked contradictory ideas. You're the one that is supposed to be creative here, video game industry messiah.

You want a game without failstates, but now you have to manage food and water in the dungeon? And then you faint? What then? Do you lose all the items you found in the dungeon? Ooops, it's a fucking fail state, isn't it? Sounds like fucking conflict to me. Sounds like I spent half an hour fucking around in the dungeon and gained nothing to show for it. Sounds like my farm is gonna wither now if my next dungeon run results in the same. Sounds like a fucking game over to me.

Attached: are you a turnip.jpg (294x400, 19K)

yeah, but is indirect, and there's not violence, which is what I am trying to argue.

I'm not a radical, I'm just thinking of ways to make an interesting game where there's not direct combat.

How bout a game where you fight using indirect systems, like poison, magic, familiars, traps, boulders, gas, and the game is about strategic placement of traps before the fight.

>How bout a game where you fight using indirect systems, like poison, magic, familiars, traps, boulders, gas, and the game is about strategic placement of traps before the fight.
Breath of Fire V : Dragon Quarter

Now that I think about it, is this just a stealth recommendation thread?

maybe, I'm just having a conversation about non violent gameplay.

I want to see more original videogames.

>OP never played a sim city/rollercoaster tycoon etc
Fuck off kid

Japs already made that decades ago
it's called the Deception series
kys

You sound like a broken record with you going on and on about non violent gameplay. People have posted shit tons of examples already.

I know there's examples of all I've mentioned.

he's obsessed with it because he's probably a huge passive-aggressive pussy bitch in real life

Your OP sounds very different. Remember this thread when you remake it 6 hours from now, like you did with your previous one.

Attached: 1238148461753.jpg (500x500, 45K)

I've been having a lot of fun with this non-violent game right here lately.

Attached: Parningstone Transport, 20th Nov 1990.png (3840x2160, 3.79M)