Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Interested in a FREE copy of HTML5 game maker Construct 2?

We'll be giving away three Personal Edition licences in next Tuesday's GDNet Direct email newsletter!

Sign up from the right-hand sidebar on our homepage and read Tuesday's newsletter for details!


We're also offering banner ads on our site from just $5! 1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


#Actualfrob

Posted 14 October 2013 - 06:39 PM

1) The easiest language is probably one you are already comfortable with. No matter what language you end up using, know that your project will probably require several hundred hours of work. There are several CCG engines out there already, you might also consider launching from one of those. Looks like Vassal might have enough existing material to reduce it to the <100 mark, but still it is a significant chunk of work.

2) Determining "easier" and "better" are both subjective. Without knowing all about you and about your background and about your designs, it would be difficult to tell. I think that if you were using an existing engine that would be the easiest path; but I don't know if that is the better path for you. If your engine supports browser-based games then go for it. I wouldn't particularly like to start with nothing and build html5 + JavaScript game from scratch, especially when existing engines can do heavy lifting for you.

3) Flash can make a 2D game fairly easily, and it has networking components, so that is certainly an option. Unity's model is not an ideal fit but people have made card games using it in the past, and it has networking components, so that is also an option. And the vassal engine supports CCG-style games and has networking components, so that is also a good option. None are bad options, and all of them have the capability to do what you describe. It looks like vassal might be the easiest to get going quickly, so you might prefer it.

4) It is easiest if the networking is put in by design. If you attempt to put together networking first you may discover networking implementation choices make the game implementation difficult, and if you put together the game and backfill the networking tasks you may discover implementation choices that make networking difficult. It is better (but more mental work) to do multiplayer and networked play interleaved as tasks as you grow your software.


My guess is that Vassal would be the better path of those mentioned because it is an engine designed to do exactly what you described, and has already been used by other people to do it, and there are tutorials and examples to do what you want. That means less work and learning and experimenting for you, which is generally a good thing.

#1frob

Posted 14 October 2013 - 06:37 PM

1) The easiest language is probably one you are already comfortable with. No matter what language you end up using, know that your project will probably require several hundred hours of work. There are several CCG engines out there already, you might also consider launching from one of those. Looks like Vassal might have enough existing material to reduce it to the <100 mark, but still it is a significant chunk of work.

2) Determining "easier" and "better" are both subjective. Without knowing all about you and about your background and about your designs, it would be difficult to tell. I think that if you were using an existing engine that would be the easiest path; but I don't know if that is the better path for you.

3) Flash can make a 2D game fairly easily, and it has networking components, so that is certainly an option. Unity's model is not an ideal fit but people have made card games using it in the past, and it has networking components, so that is also an option. And the vassal engine supports CCG-style games and has networking components, so that is also a good option. None are bad options, and all of them have the capability to do what you describe. It looks like vassal might be the easiest to get going quickly, so you might prefer it.

4) It is easiest if the networking is put in by design. If you attempt to put together networking first you may discover networking implementation choices make the game implementation difficult, and if you put together the game and backfill the networking tasks you may discover implementation choices that make networking difficult. It is better (but more mental work) to do multiplayer and networked play interleaved as tasks as you grow your software.


My guess is that Vassal would be the better path of those mentioned because it is an engine designed to do exactly what you described, and has already been used by other people to do it, and there are tutorials and examples to do what you want. That means less work and learning and experimenting for you, which is generally a good thing.

PARTNERS