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.


Member Since 06 Oct 2007
Offline Last Active Today, 11:02 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Managing spaceship - initial draft

21 September 2014 - 02:17 PM

To Do:
Create connections between components so keeping them in good shape requires balanced power, meet dependencies and set priorities.
How to control or manipulate this environment? How to modify behavior?
How to let player create his ship of dreams with perfect crew? Without overflowing with too many small details and yet giving him felling that he is in control. To not create situation where captain/player is a passive observer.



The problem with manage gameplay. The human is limited in what can be managed in real time. So what does a captain really do. Is take responsibility and delegate orders to key figures. These key figures are regular communications between Captain and crew. Also every crew member need to function independent. They mostly know what to do. By following protocol. These protocols can also be managed and tweaked.


Example. Like star trek. If you are captain with aggressive mind set. If fired upon return fire after shield up. While other will allow some minimal damage but want diplomatic communicate with the other vessel.


Crew work in shifts. So does the captain. Who ever has the bridge, will act at urgent events. Or you get priority com to make the decision.


But something like your ship is attacked. The bridge crew will do a shield UP and even return fire.

Also avoiding collisions.


This means these kind of games largely depends on sophisticated crew AI and effective UI systems.


Example while attack you go on red alert. Which means your UI is set or filter out all non essential combat features. Like managing protocol. Warehousing.


But while not on bridge duty as caption you could do some administration. Like tweaking protocols from specific function or task. Which have a more complex non real-time UI. 

Also you do a lot of comparing stats etc. so kind of spreadsheet graphical UI is handy to. While you set equipment setting for specific roles for fighter wings on your carrier.


I am also very inspired by Scifi shows.






For me UI and AI can make or break the game. So I focus more on that.

In Topic: FPS Games, Recoil and Spread

20 July 2014 - 03:15 PM

So, in FPS games, there are a number of things at work that determine your accuracy, as you know.

Excuse me if these terms are something you already know.


Recoil is something you have to adjust for based on the power and rate of fire for the weapon. High power weapons usually have high recoil to reduce the time between shots that they are fired. A high rate of fire weapon has high recoil because each projectile knocks the weapon in a certain direction.


Spread is used to emulate stability of your aim. If you are running, the spread is very high, if you are walking it is low, if you are crouching it is even less and if you are prone and not moving at all it is at its lowest.


This isn't an original idea at all, but wouldn't it provide a better gameplay experience if the concept of spread was replaced with the crosshair moving around? So, if you are moving or stationary, standing straight up, crouching, prone, whatever the crosshair would be the same size. However, to do the same thing that spread does, the crosshair would move around. If you are walking at high speed the crosshair would be moving up and down, left and right. Whereever it was is where the projectile would go, and there would be no randomness or misunderstandings about where you were actually aiming. Like recoil, this would be something that the user could control more directly. With recoil you can compensate somewhat for it if you know how. With spread you can only compensate for it indirectly by reducing the randomness. With a moving crosshair, you would be able to adjust your aim to compensate for your stance or movement speed if you knew how, and there would be no "what? I had the crosshair centered on the other player, what happened?" kind of reactions.


Edit: It seems like some games, e.g. Battlefield 4, have scope sway, which is similar to this, but the scope sway is present along with spread. Also, for games where there is no crosshair or it can be disabled, the rendering of the weapon would have to realistically show that is was bobbing, which it seems to do in a fair amount of games already.


Thoughts? Comments? The only thing I can think of that might make this an issue is that having a moving object that the player constantly needs to track might be annoying or headache inducing for some, similar to motion blur effects.


Recoil is reaction between to masses departing each other, a small and a big one.

And a blast wave.


bullet mass is fraction of the gun. So the heavier the gun the smaller the bullet less recoil.

P90 and MP7 are solution to go for a high speed lighter bullet. You win les recoil and gain range.

Other solution are counter weight and muzzle brakes. KrissV out performs a Mp5 in full auto accuracy.

Barret .50 with muzzle brake is much more doable.


Big bullet more recoil heavier gun better recoil handling but less agile.


Spread is how you handling recoil and weapon stability and much more in RL but for game it would be to RPG ish.


Stress, hart beat, breathing, weapon mass. Your aim fidelity depends on weapon length. Try to keep a laser pointer steady.


Sway is natural but a short weapon has more high freq. sway then a long riffle. Which have a low freq. sway.

Because it more easy to handle small short weapon to different angle then a heavier long one.


Most rifles have barrel above center of mass so muzzle climb.

Most butt stock are below the barrel alignment so muzzle climb.


A M16 it is aligned so faster and accurate follow up shots on target.  


This mean small short SMG will spray extreme.


A sniper rifle is accurate from point blank to distance in MOA but it is long so slow sway but lot less agile.

A bull pup sniper gain what agility but looses stability more high freq. sway


Recon sniper with 54kg equipment have M4 and sniper rifle and is not alone Spotter and some.


A SVU-AS make sense to. Shorter barrel although bull pup. More heavy ware out barrel. So high freq. less accurate sniper. But with full auto option. But with 7.62x54R a heavy recoil and limited mag. Suits urban DMR role best.



What I miss in games is this why have snipers sway. Why are LMG so slow.  


everything has sway and Weight and blast power and length.


But some weapons have designer made smart choices or use solutions to reduce recoil and get more range.

Some weapons are just better then others.


BF4 uses the Pick up special weapons.


There is also a option to go a symmetrical warfare.


8 special forces vs 32 regular.


4spec + 8  regular + 8 indigious forces vs the same 4 + 8 + 8


To kill a special ops count as 4 kills.

special vs special count as one but non spec 1/4


 So there are much more option to balance a FPS game. 

In Topic: Map in spacegame? How to avoid all-open travel and "boring" worlds?

26 June 2014 - 12:43 PM

I would go for FTL drive which effect the fabric op space time like compress it in front and stretch it on the back. But it's a radiant effect as it influence a large zone at the back and in front. How ever this means the much more bending of space time need powerful big huge antimatter drive and for correct coursing in this zone of bending there need no heavy mass like space craft near by as it distorted the zone and also the direction you go.


So going into large void a big heavy  FTL drive space craft could go very large amount the speed off light.


where smaller engine influencing smaller zone could be used between station from other planet to other planet orbit.


ships control and sensor the fabric of space bending so turn down the effect as a automatic speed limit. And the limit of the engine size


To make some thing small feel big is make thing slow and view distance short.


Making something big feel small is up the speed and far sighting

In Topic: What truly makes an enemy/boss hard to beat and be wary of?

19 June 2014 - 05:21 PM

Well it could be that some gamers are more into the challenge. Me more for having fun. And prefer realism. The problem with End Bosses The seam very much more powerful. But they have a Achilles heel. Some gamers have a natural game instinct, to find this really fast. Ore are on the same brain waves of level designers so. After few tries they get trough.


Well the other end. It's 10 to 30 times its quit exit DE install and move on to the next game.


Why I think a lot of gamers don't like to be stuck and replay one piece of a game so many times. Which also brakes the story flow.

Just like commercials on TV movies. But then much longer.

QTE I also don't like. But then again a small Hardcore crowed want to be challenged and find modern mass-market triple A games to Easy.


MSG4 the action between the insane large cut scenes and end bosses was fun. so the other 2 of 3 fazes not.


Currently playing tomb raider. I did encounter a End Boss which taken out by specific QTE event. double bummer.


The problem with End bosses is. Player differ very much by skill set. Often to key to figure out a boss is the keep up with avoiding its attack.

Just like in online games some people doesn't have the skill set as a regular game to avoid attacks. This means for some people it not doable at all. even if the look up walkthrough guide it still very difficult.


But if you could adjust end boss to player skill as making it more adoptive to player play style. If player is slow the boss entity react to your skill level. As more over confident taunt the player. attacking in more risky way with no hurry more. But more skilled player also measure trough the regular level  enemies. It could act more defensive and low risk attacks as if your skill reputation is well know by those NPC. Also the regular foo act to skill.


If bosses get to difficult you loose a very large audience.

To easy you loose those hardcore audiences

In Topic: Onboard spaceship gameplay

19 June 2014 - 04:58 PM

Well first the boring stuff is done by the AI like Automated pilot or NPC Crew. The interesting things are done by the players. Also It would be nice if there is choice.

There are many ship task player could do. But I won't go for putting on every task a player, as most task are periodic and some sets are only done in specific situations.

1/10 to 1/3 of the crew. Larger ships even fewer.


Commander/Captain the one who orders players and NPC. // one is in the lead.

Pilot handle the short navigation and main fixed guns.

Navigation does the advance navigation //  compute hyperjumps and approach vector work close with the pilot

Radar officers could handle the many sensors.

Drones controller //. one officer manage the many types of drones.

Remote fighter drones. // Player could remotely use heavy drones. Or take over special drone on mission like a probe.

Primary turrets controller // some one manage all the primary guns

Gunneries // some big guns could be handle by one player.

secondary turrets controller of these there are much more of so some needs to manage them..

deep space radar missile controller. // it's normal to track many objects in space as very far object as line of sight is very far. and missile ranges are very far.

In space sensory is important that when combating far a few player could control there own deep space radar array.


Docked ships so a player could lead some of the drones.

Security against boarding

Boarding marines

A role for micro managing the ship //

Manage repair crew and drones.

Defense commander of anti missile missile and missile defense turrets. Flak guns

flight commander who manage the strike force on carrier type ship.


It doesn't mean a big ship needs 25 player. 5 to 7 and player could pick a role avaible the like. And fill the un slotted roles by AI Crew.


Also some play styles or gameplay doesn't lend well for larger multi crew vessels.

Like trading or building. How ever. 2 to 3 could. If you open automated task for the extra players.


For one player all task could be overwhelming but would be playable if game give you very skilled AI crew to assist you.

which means those who you don't need to baby sit. So a very stong AI is needed. This is no easy task.


For very large multi crew ships to keep those gamers busy, go for more combat rich gameplay like battle and boarding.

And fast traveling to the action.


If fleet commander just like the carrier commander would have also a fleet to manage.


so I see some possibilities, but never see it done before. So needs to prototype if a mixture of this leads to fun gameplay for some.