Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

We're offering banner ads on our site from just $5!

1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


Zido_Z

Member Since 02 Oct 2008
Offline Last Active Jul 13 2014 11:18 AM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Brainstorming Multi-party combat systems

03 August 2013 - 10:34 AM

 


I have two, as I stated: accessibility and strategy. A spectrum that I'm going back and forth from one end to the other in an attempt to see which will be more fun for the majority. 

 

accessibility over strategy every time for maximum mass appeal. but such a choice is only necessary when they conflict in a mutually exclusive way.

 

i assume you want strategy, but not at the cost of accessibility.

 

probably the best approach with maximum appeal would be a system with lots of strategy, where the player could choose from perhaps three levels of complexity and control.

 

the novice level would be the simplest, with maximum accessibility, and minimum learning curve. the expert level would give full strategic control, at the cost of a more complex user interface and combat rule set with a higher learning curve.

 

they may even be designed so each is a direct super set of the other. so once you master the game in novice mode, you switch to veteran combat mode, and add some more buttons, rules, and combat options to use. then you can switch to expert mode and see the full strategic combat system.

 

have your cake and eat it too!   ; )

 

 

That is a very interesting way of looking at it. But that would involve also creating three entirely different balance parts of the game. Of course, this just means it becomes a difficulty level, which isn't a bad thing, so I will keep this kind of option in mind.

 

This question is strange, you're basically comparing completely different things.

 

It would be like me saying "I've got an idea for a game set in space. Should I make it an FPS or a top-down strategy?" - it makes no sense, the fundamental underlining gameplay is missing from your idea thus you don't really have a game idea at all.

 

I have a clear vision for my game. But I'm not close minded to just think in a matter of genres. That's a trap. I know what I want to pull off and the experience I want to make the player feel. And so that's my list based off what kind of gameplay I want to give them, gameplay mostly involved in combat that will essentially influence a lot of the other design in the long run, yes. No matter how you dress it, the game should still be the same on a macro level.

 

I hope that made sense.


In Topic: Brainstorming Multi-party combat systems

02 August 2013 - 02:04 PM

 


So I researched some combat systems for my parameters, wondering which will fit what I want.

 

which is... ?

 

IE what are you looking for?

 

 

I have two, as I stated: accessibility and strategy. A spectrum that I'm going back and forth from one end to the other in an attempt to see which will be more fun for the majority. 


In Topic: Story Planning Software

03 July 2013 - 04:17 PM

Thank you guys for the suggestions.


In Topic: List of Video Game Design Exercises?

25 February 2013 - 10:54 PM

@richar: Thank you, richard. I just bought the book on amazon.

 

@Mratt: I do that a lot while I'm walking around. It's a common thing of mines, though it was tied more to imagination back when I was kid, As I got older, it just became a way for me to immerse myself in some little dream while each little thing passed by me. Sometimes, end up drawing it when I get home or to some place where I can sit down. Music works even better to me cause I tend to use it to help me paint some sort of scenario or mechanic in my head. So I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks like this.


In Topic: Anyone here a self-taught graphics programmer?

01 February 2013 - 02:40 AM

My first hardware accelerated application was a MS Word document!  No kidding!  Before I get to that, let me tell the story of learning to use opengl in basic, assembly and then C, and yes in that order.  In early high school I played around a lot with qbasic and was writing simple wireframe 3d mazes with horrible performance.  I didn't have a C compiler, so I started playing around with debug.com, and started writing little assemly language routines to speed up certain slow things in basic.  Debug sucks, it can't even do labels, you have to specify the exact jump address. You literally have to write JMP 0x322 and hope you put some code at 0x322.  So I wrote a qbasic program that reads in assembly source with labels, strips them out, runs it through debug with dummy addresses (JMP 0x1234 or whatever).  It looks at the redirected output of debug to see what address the assembler said it was using for each line, figured out the labels, and then reassembled it a second time.  It was so cruddy.  While I was doing this, I also got involved in a high school robotics program called Botball, where you programed lego robots in a language called Interactive C.

 

Back to graphics.  I wanted to try using GL, but like I said, I didn't have any compilers.  MS Word 2000 had a built in version of VB, called VBA.  It turns out VBA can load and run functions from DLLs (scary), so I wrote a word VBA macro that loaded system32.dll, and called the function to get the application's window handle.  I played around with GDI, and got to draw dots and lines onto the word document window using only the win32 api.  So then I loaded opengl32.dll.  After crashing word several times, I managed to get a textured quad on the screen, put there by the video card!   I then shortly discovered that the Windows DDK for Window 98 came with a FREE COPY of MASM.  So I started writing programs in the psychotic mix of dll's written in MASM that were loaded into MS Word's Visual Basic.  A teacher at high school saw what I was doing, and gave me a copy of Borland C++.  I was able to apply what I learned about writing PC programs in MASM and Basic to what I learned in Botball's 'Interactive C' and from there everything took off.  After I finished highschool, I did EECS at UC Berkeley, and now I do software for a living.

 

I'm so glad visual studio has free editions.  I would have free loved visual studio as a kid.  Ubuntu would have also rocked.  Kids today can access this stuff so easily now.

That's the difference between you and me: I learned programming to let me make video games so I can put my ideas in an interactive media. You learned it simply for the joy of discovery and making software work. As a byproduct, I've learned that, too, but I don't know if I will ever get into as deep passionate as programmers like yourself. It's just funny that I'm learning the same stuff that others in the game industry take paths in learning, anyway, so I suppose I may be as passionate as people like yourself. I sometimes think I'm just a man using programming as a tool to get something done, and I believe that to be the case as it's a means to an end.


PARTNERS