Avid Amphibians

[carefree]

[glow=orange,2,300]Avid Amphibians[/glow]




My entry for the GMG 'This Game is Art' competition. Who knew frogs had such a big appetite!? Guide them in their hectic chow-down against the clock. There are six unlockable frogs to choose from, along with the two you begin with. Instructions are in the text file, and you may want to adjust your mouse speed. Happy eating!

>>Download Avid Amphibians<<

[fawful]

Nice game!Original gameplay(if you ignore the fact this is cactuses website),bosses are hard as they should be(if you ignore the fact this is cactuses website) and it's got frog in it!
Great game!....wibbit

[cactus]

I didn't want to ask this at the GMG since I didn't want to affect your chances in the competition, but I'll do so here. Just out of curiousity, how do you fit this into a competition theme such as "This game is art"? I do know all games should be some form of art, but what separates this from a game that you would feel less happy about labeling with the a-word?

I thought the game was pretty fun. Got to a few levels after the helicopter dude. To be constructive I'd say that the backgrounds weren't that appealing compared to the pixel graphics of the sprites. Other than that, good job!

[carefree]

Actually I was hoping for somebody to ask me that question here, or elsewhere. I see (most) 'art games' and think crap with a meaning. A game designer doesn't have to choose between the two. Art doesn't even mean that what it's used to describe has to have meaning. Look at these pictures and you'll see what I'm getting at. Which of these have a meaning? Are all of them art?





Sometimes people find an intended meaning, but other times people disect art and create a meaning that wasn't intended. I hope that all makes sense.

I didn't spent as much time as I should have on the backgrounds. I will however be extending the game at some point in time to include everything I wanted to. =)

EDIT : One more thing I just thought of. Early art tried to mimic real life down to the very last visible detail. It evolved to contain meaning. You could say games are going through the same process.

[xeno]

Jun 26, 2008 23:17:55 GMT -5 carefree said:

EDIT : One more thing I just thought of. Early art tried to mimic real life down to the very last visible detail. It evolved to contain meaning. You could say games are going through the same process.

I agree with your point that games are evolving to contain meaning - more and more game developers are intentionally putting "meaning" into their games beyond "fun".
But the first generations of videogames had nothing to do with mimicing life down to the last detail - they were mostly crazy ideas with unrealistic worlds. It wasn't until later that game theorists attempted to imitate the real world with anatomically correct faces, realistic physics and simulation games (Civilization, The Sims). Earlier games seemed to be more about blasting crap in a crazy universe

Edit: Oh, and forgot to say that your link's broken, is there another host?