Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Member Since 19 Oct 2007
Offline Last Active Today, 02:24 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Do you ever have to worry about your stories being stolen?

18 October 2016 - 08:32 PM

As an indie, the cost and time to worry about this is too high.

In Topic: Freemium without pay to win

14 October 2016 - 12:49 AM

I was a hater of in-game purchase model games. I just hated anything that I should pay stuff inside the game. Until I find it just fine for PvE (Player versus Enemies) games. This is extremely debatable in many game forums I've been (and it's always heated up with all the swearing words over poor vs rich debates);


In my opinion, there is no P2W in PvE games. Just none. Some debated that you can be better only if you pay, but that's the point. If one player is better in the game, then the game becomes easier for everyone in the party, and not necessarily either, because it's all back the skills of each Player. One can pay more for instant stuff, but doesn't always play better than others. But what makes people get irritated is because only those who pay can be instantly better than others in the first days make conclusion that it is P2W, when in fact that it isn't.


Note on "instantly", means the free players can still get to the point of as good as the ones who pay for the game. The games are like Phantasy Star Online 2, Final Fantasy Mevius, and more.


What makes it P2W, is when you can smack other players directly (or indirectly) with paid-only items. For me, that's the only P2W I can find; when there is an interaction of Player(s) against Player(s) that can be taken advantage of by paying the game. The games are like Dragon Nest (Ladder only), HIT, and more.


Cosmetics, as long as they don't have effect against other players (20% damage against non-paying users :D ), it's definitely just fine.


So for me, cosmetic is definitely what you're looking for, and PvE model.

In Topic: How Long Do You Finish Games with Stories?

04 October 2016 - 08:33 PM

Just so everyone is clarified, I'm not really asking how much time you play all games then make an average out of it. Of course, it varies. Just as specific as what was your last game and how long does it take until you finish it.

Like kseh is a nice example, plays hours of playing a game, but now needs more days to do so cause it's not 3 hours a day anymore, but 1 hour a day due to bringing kids to bed. His last game was Doom & Destiny and have 20 minutes - 60 minutes long and finally get to end of story update 2 after 2 - 3 months. Etc. That's probably much like my situation, except the kids one


I am also not asking this to learn how long should a campaign take to finish. If I wanna ask how long a campaign should take, I think I'll ask this in Game Design section. This is just a casual player-to-player question, no strings or survey attached.  :rolleyes:

I just feel like I am in this "too old playing games" group (I deny that I am! but facts aren't telling me that I am not anymore :wacko:), and do other people felt the same? or they still play like no other (outside of testing your own game, that's for sure :P). For those who are younger (still in school/college), do you still have that much energy to finish games without being distracted with Facebook and stuff that stops you? :D


Oh, may not be directly related, but I found an old article that might be interesting, about why most people don't finish games.

In Topic: Coding-Style Poll

28 September 2016 - 05:56 PM

The reason why I'm flexible with any coding standard and has to be extremely consistent with it, is because it won't waste time at all once I get used to it. And since all the code looks just the same, it's as if it's me that writes that code. I don't know. Harmony?

What wastes my time is when nobody wants to setup a coding standard for a project and start creating inconsistent coding mess cause everyone wants their own style and start screaming about it in the middle of the project.

Try zero coding standard on JavaScript and you'll be surprised how many different implementations there when defining a class.

In Topic: Coding-Style Poll

27 September 2016 - 07:39 AM

I'm flexible to what is agreed on and what's already there. Different code style doesn't bother me at all, as long as it is consistent. What's annoying is when it is not consistent. What annoys me is like this:

void foo()
    if (true) { // <-- inconsistent braces.
        if (false)
            do something // <-- no braces gives problem when more than 1 line is needed, and again it's inconsistent.

Any prefix, as long as they're consistent, I'm on it, even if it's as silly as prefix "S" for struct. I'll be annoyed if suddenly I see struct without "S" when it is already agreed that we should use "S" for naming structs.


Technically, however, "m_" gave me a problem with IDE. If there's an agreement not to use "m_", of course, as I said, I'm okay with it. But technically, in my experience, "m_" for private properties makes things easier on code completion and realizing on private properties on Visual Studio. Same goes to "g_" or "kVarName". Visual Studio's code completion somehow doesn't make a good order on which is private and which is public, which is global and which is related to the class and order things by that.

But in JetBrains WebStorm with code as sick as JavaScript, it can easily and automatically tell me which is private (semantically) or not, which part of the class or not, even with just a "_" prefix.