Casey Hardman

You say that the subclasses can share abilities and playstyles.  Do you mean rather than choosing one subclass once you reach level X and only using skills from that subclass, you can mix spells from each subclass and blend them together in a way?

If so, I suppose each subclass could be treated similar to a "school of magic" or "skill tree".  For example, Fire magic excels at dealing damage, Ice excels at snaring and slowing but lacks damage, and so on.  Then the player can mix spells from each school/tree to have their own unique playstyle.

Or did you mean that each one is generally similar, but have different art behind their spells?  That's kind of what I get from this:

they have very distinct spell effects, nature mages throw leaves and make spikes shoot from the earth while a shadow mage throw shadowy tentacles and swirling patches of darkness. The game effect is pretty much the same, damage and snare or root. But I know players love to customize.

If so, I don't think that'll make players feel like they're customizing, since there will eventually be hundreds of players with the same subclass as them.

Judging by the way you phrased that last question, I'm assuming you aren't fully aware of what Maya is, so I'll go into a bit of detail about it:

Maya is a 3D modeling program.  In other words, it's used to make models and animate them so you can import them into your game and put them into the game world.

Blender is another 3D modeling program.  It's free to install the full version.  I use it and I think it has a genius design, though I'm not very talented with 3D modeling.

Now, with 3D modeling programs, you can make crates and characters and creatures...whatever you might need in your game, with enough skill, you can make it with 3D modeling.  However, you should remember that 3D modeling is it's own thing, an entirely new practice compared to programming/scripting.  It takes artistic skill and lots of practice before you'll start making the amazing graphics you see in AAA games.  Also, 3D modeling only makes the mesh and the animations and such.  You'd still have to add textures/UV maps to your models to make them not just gray figures with no color.  Skyrim and games with high-quality, realistic graphics usually use bump maps (in short, they make textures look less flat) and other special techniques to make things look even better/more realistic.

When I got into Unity at the start, I was only interested in learning how to script with it, so I didn't get into 3D modeling and texturing right away.  I got into it later, though, and picked up Blender for 3D modeling and GIMP for the textures (both free).

Now, I don't mean to try and totally discourage you from art if you want to try it.  I'm just saying this because I wanted to make sure you knew what it was and that it's kind of its own thing.  If you want to do it the way I did and focus on scripting for a while before getting into art, that's fine.  If you want to learn 3D modeling and texturing while learning how to script, that's fine too.  Really, it's all about what you're interested in.  You don't even have to know how to do both unless you absolutely must make games all by yourself.  If you don't like 3D modeling, you can wait until later when you're good enough at scripting to get a team to help you with the art.

Anyway, now that I've rambled on forever, here are some links and tuts for Blender and UnityScript:

Here's a link to the official Blender website

Here's a link to forums for Blender (if you have questions about Blender in the future, they might be better fit there than they would be here at GameDev)

Here's a tutorial to Unity's basics

and here's a tutorial to complete beginner's programming with UnityScript
That tutorial supposedly "assumes no prior programming experience", which I believe is what you're looking for.

Good luck and have fun!

Here are my two cents about Unity vs. UDK:

I only used UDK for a tiny bit and never got into scripting with it, but it seems less beginner-friendly than Unity3D.  I believe it comes with a bit more capability of "graphical finesse" and customizable materials (which alter how things look).  However, Unity Pro (which costs $1,500 at the moment, I believe) is always an option if you need fancy graphical tools somewhere along the road when/if your game is nearing finished.

I've used Unity for a while now, and I have to say it's wonderful.  The scripting is very intuitive in the way that you can reuse your scripts on various objects in a hassle-free way.  Unity also supports multiple languages: C#, UnityScript, and Boo.  UnityScript is called JavaScript by the engine, but it's pretty much a totally different thing, so people call it UnityScript sometimes to avoid confusion with JavaScript, which is for web development.

Also, in my opinion, scripting with Unity is still very similar to programming and won't be neglecting you of "proper programming skills" as much as some might think.

If you're getting into Unity, here are some tips, just from my personal opinion as a user of Unity and with some experience using Visual Studio and C#:

• If you need help with Unity or scripting something in Unity, you can ask for help on answers.unity3d.com.  The community there is active and helpful.  Remember to actually try and script something before you ask a question, otherwise you're just asking people to script your game for you!
• Bookmark Unity's scripting reference.  It has lots of examples for you to look at, and you can change them to show UnityScript, C#, or Boo.
• You may have an easier time using UnityScript instead of C#.  The reason is that UnityScript is more dynamic and might not bother you as much in some situations.
• Don't worry too much about which language you start with.  Switching from using UnityScript with Unity3D to using C# with Visual Studio took about a week for me to get comfortable.  It's mostly just syntax stuff that you shouldn't have too much trouble with.  The largest part is just getting the concepts of programming down.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be offensive, but I just don't understand why this was even posted.

I guess the OP thought of (typical game scenario) and then decided to...get ready for this...DO THE OPPOSITE to create something 100% unique and marketable!!

Seriously, though, I think this belongs in the Completely Raw Game Ideas With Very Little Thought Put Into Them forum.  It's just a basic idea that I'm sure has been thought of a thousand times over when people were wracking their brains to find (typical game scenario) so they could...get ready...DO THE OPPOSITE!! or...CHANGE ONE TO TWO THINGS!!

In games like Fallout 3 and Skyrim, the save/load feature never really made me feel less immersed.  In fact, if I felt I had to go through with my decision to lop someone's head off and face the entire city full of guards and citizens afterwards, I would rarely do it and wouldn't end up having much fun...

Maybe it's just because these games are the type where, if you die, you load your last save and try again instead of having the storyline changed.  However, I still feel like I'd like to win if I can, whether it's on the first try or the seventh.  I'd prefer trying multiple times.

I don't think this would ruin immersion, because in my opinion, immersion isn't "thinking you're inside the game" - you'll almost always be aware that you're playing a game, but if you're immersed, you'll care more about what happens in the game.  If your players care enough to repeatedly try to beat the specific fight, then why stop them?

I say, let them save/load, but tell them and remind them throughout the game that they don't have to win to progress.

Not to derail this post back on-topic, but...this! All of this! It's fun to have the option to try out a few strategies before settling on just one, and sometimes it's fun to just go total rampage on a village, without having the consequences of such permanently tied to your character. Save/load gives players greater options to play the game the way they want to play it; it causes less anxiety about making sure you're always doing the "right" thing, regardless of what you actually feel like doing.

But really, for me it still all boils down to the simple fact that I need to be able to quit and turn off the game when I'm done playing. If a game's going to hold me hostage, making me play for another half-hour before I can save and quit, then I'm not going to be playing that game all that much. Period.

I agree.  It's annoying when you feel like you "have" to play longer because you'll lose progress if you stop now.  Quick-save features like Fallout 3 and Skyrim had were life-savers in situations like these, and both of those games were ones I was immersed with.

(blah)

(blah)

Please keep it civil guys. Balance is a complex issue, and extremely difficult to evaluate for all but the simplest rulesets. Strong statements such as 'Starcraft is balanced' or 'Classes are always imbalanced' are actually pretty difficult to support, and frankly, off topic for this thread. If you want to discuss balance, please do so in a new thread.

You made my night with those quotes...they were so fitting of the situation.

In games like Fallout 3 and Skyrim, the save/load feature never really made me feel less immersed.  In fact, if I felt I had to go through with my decision to lop someone's head off and face the entire city full of guards and citizens afterwards, I would rarely do it and wouldn't end up having much fun...

Maybe it's just because these games are the type where, if you die, you load your last save and try again instead of having the storyline changed.  However, I still feel like I'd like to win if I can, whether it's on the first try or the seventh.  I'd prefer trying multiple times.

I don't think this would ruin immersion, because in my opinion, immersion isn't "thinking you're inside the game" - you'll almost always be aware that you're playing a game, but if you're immersed, you'll care more about what happens in the game.  If your players care enough to repeatedly try to beat the specific fight, then why stop them?

I say, let them save/load, but tell them and remind them throughout the game that they don't have to win to progress.

I'm not going to try and get into this too much, but I'd just like to note that "doing fun things" to some is "sitting behind a computer and learning how to script, program, model, etc."
The quoted user seems to imply that chasing after girls and playing sports is the definite, static description of "fun".  Plus, the "usual highschool things" seems like it could vary wildly depending on who you're talking about.

I saw some video of a news report on a """""""discovery""""""" of the 'God particle', but the person they were interviewing (a scientist or something) basically just said "So yeah, we were doing this stuff and we found that we got results!!"


Great, glad this is on the news.  Maybe once you find out something useful you should seek publicity?

They're not things nobody else notices. They're talked about to death every single time the topic comes up. It's boring. I think the OP brings up an interesting topic if one has the energy to really get into it. You bring up a different topic. There's a button for that, and it's not "reply".

Sorry, I was just giving my opinion on the thread.  I didn't know those belonged outside of replies.  I guess I could make a blog for it, post it there, make a new thread called "My Opinion On "Female Enemies in Beat 'em Up"" and leave a link to my blog post there.

Seriously though, I didn't mean to offend you (or whatever reaction it provoked; I can't really put my finger on it...)  I was just replying to the thread, even if you think I was trying to morph it into something else.

"Why is it that people only worry about offending the females?

For what it's worth, in my post above I basically "yes it's sexist against men, but likely nobody will actually get offended anyway".

Anyway, does every thread on the topic have to get derailed like that? Go post on the lounge if you're uspet about feminists.

I was just noting on a few things that no one else seems to be able to notice.  It was an answer to the question presented.  I wasn't trying to start an argument or derail the thread.
I don't know why people always try to shove words down my throat...

Why is it that people only worry about offending the females?

<rant> Probably because most of them are overly sensitive and offensive about their gender because they feel they are worse due to their own projections. </rant>

Anyway, as I was saying, if it never crossed your mind to ask yourself this question:

"If this main character is a handsome male that will ultimately get pommeled, would it make the males playing this game feel alienated?"

then why do you ask yourself this question:

"If this main character is a beautiful female that will ultimately get pommeled, would it make the females playing this game feel alienated?"

<rant> It seems like females want equal rights for the positive things it will apply to them, yet they neglect to realize that men are treated unequally in thousands of situations, too... </rant>

Seriously though, if no one would care about applying a man to this position, why would it be any different for a female?

When I used Game Maker, I preferred GML (Game Maker Language) much more than the drag-and-drop interface because it seemed to be faster.  It also helped me later when I got into different languages because I had some knowledge of general coding syntax, such as variables, arrays, for loops, ifs, functions, and so on.

Hi i always noted that in all rpgs glasscannon characters are always stronger than any other character. This forces players into mindlessly putting all points in str.

1) A damage dealer is a better farmer. He can kill faster get  more gold, items, exp. If a game doesnt have exponential xp requirements  then the glasscannon will have twice the level of a tank, thus more hp.


Then implement a design that counteracts this.  If it's like that, you've made a system where your enemies aren't harmful enough to make a glass cannon worry about health at all.

2) A glasscannon has unlimited hp:  People always attack the  nearest target, a glasscannon character can just stand at the back in  team fights, hide in a location that prevents the enemy from spotting  them, or kite the enemy with ranged attacks.Extra survivability is  useless when you can  just potion spam to recover full hp, or never take damage because you  are ranged character.  In some games tanks can still die in 1 hit from instant death, petrify,  etc.

Since when do people always attack the nearest target?  What if the game is not MapleStory and has no potions?  What if there is no position in the game where no one can ever spot you ever?  What if a melee character...now stay with me here...WALKS UP to a ranged character and attacks them?  RPGs where you get 1-shotted regardless of your health are a lost cause.

3) A damage dealer is a healer. For example you kill tryndamere in 0.35 sec with your instant cast no global cooldown leblanc macro. congratz you just healed / prevented 17.000 damage when soraka can only heal 300 every 10 sec.


I've played League of Legends a bit, but I still don't know what LeBlanc's ultimate does, so I don't really understand.

How can you tackle this problem in your rpg ?
1) How can you make hp meaningfull ?


Force enemies to attack you?  Provide higher damage reduction based on the stat that gives maximum health?  Think?

2) I wanted to make hp stronger than damage but i havent found a way. i tried increasing the hp gained per stamina stat but battles had the same result !!!

Maybe implement higher values so you have a wider range of possibilities?  Such as 14 health and 10 damage or ... something other than 1 str = 1 damage and 1 stamina = 1 health..?  Where is attack speed in your equation?

Glasscannon : 500 stamina, 500 str.
Tank         : 700 stamina, 300 str.

Example 1:  1 str causes 1 damage.
             1 stamina grants 10 hp.

glasscannon(500.0,500.0) wins Tank(700.0,300) with 769.9998319149017 / 5000.0 hp ( 15.399996337890625% ) in 94 attacks.

Example 2:  1 str causes 1 damage.
                   1 stamina grants 1000 hp.
Result:

glasscannon(500.0,500.0,0.0,0.0,0.0) wins Tank(700.0,300.0,0.0,0.0,0.0) with 79969.98330950737 / 500000.0 hp ( 15.993996874999999% ) in 9334 attacks.

Is this strange? no matter how you "favor" hp stat, the result of the battle wont change !!! Because the tank will still deal less overall damage, and cant match against the glasscannon.

Their roles are not the same.  Tanks aren't meant for dealing damage, they are meant for absorbing damage.  Like I said above, if you change it from 1 HP/DMG per stat point, then you would get different results...also, if you're not in a total 1-on-1-PvP game, then tanks will have a different role.  Leave the DPS to the glass cannon and make sure they don't die?

Are we forced to live in 1/1 hp world ? where hp is useless ? how can i fix this with a linear damage formula ? Do i make hp deal damage as well ?

Troll Threads for ratings yay, rate me up kthxby!!

ME TOO!

I love how the OP just states things.  FPS' suck!  Why?  What are your points against it?

Must be a troll..

What is the goal?  Will you simply play until you can't advance any more?
It seems kind of contradictory when you say "Building residentials increases birth rate (and in turn increases population) and culture point.  High culture reduces birth rate"...so you get more birth rate and then you lose it?  Unless the culture point is different than the plain culture in some way?