SpindleyQ's picture

It feels a little weird just throwing the word "Trainwreck" all over the place, like a proper noun with an established meaning. Is it cool that I'm essentially using "trainwreck" as the name of a genre? Because if there's a better shorthand to refer to the sorts of games this site's about, I'm open to suggestions.

SpindleyQ's picture

(My other descriptor that

(My other descriptor that I've been thinking about is "Gonzo game design", but I don't think it really fits with the journalistic meaning of the word. Seems to convey "reckless abandon" to me, though.)

Isaac's picture

What's wrong with the term

What's wrong with the term "Gonzo?" I think it's a perfectly good descriptor of the genre, assuming I understand the mission here. Wikipedia says:

"Gonzo is a style of reportage, filmmaking, or any form of multimedia production in which the reporter, filmmaker or author is intrinsically enmeshed with the subject action (rather than being a passive observer)."

Isn't that kind of what this is all about? Maniacs creating cool stuff out of--and perhaps in an attempt to embrace--their own insanity...
But of course there's no reason to observe a limited set of descriptors, either. So, you know, call it whatever feels right :D

zum's picture

Yeah, I'm not sure it's the

Yeah, I'm not sure it's the best way to label the genre. I doubt any of the creators featured in the Gallery would suggest that their games are works of art, but some might not appreciate their creations being referred to as glorious trainwrecks (even if it's meant in the most loving way possible.)

The other term you used on the frontpage, postcardware, isn't bad, but it's obviously not accurate enough for this context. Maybe a new compound term? Wreckware?

SpindleyQ's picture


Ridiculousware? Awesomeware? Absurdware? Reckless Abandonware?

SpindleyQ's picture


zum's picture

I think they prefer the term

I think they prefer the term transientware.

Or is that itinerantware?