Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Cap'n VG

Member Since 17 Mar 2011
Offline Last Active Jan 16 2016 11:14 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Do I need a Laptop or a PC?

16 January 2016 - 02:22 AM

Desktops are indisputably more powerful than laptops at any given price point. Miniaturization costs money and power restrictions cost performance. On the flip side there are many capable and reasonably priced laptops out there with plenty of power, more than enough to get work done. You should work on identifying your actual needs and software requirements first, as well as your needs for laptop size, battery life, performance, etc. For the time being, it doesn't sound like you need anything outside the realm of readily available thousand dollar laptops, like an Inspiron 15" 7000 series, Lenovo Y50, etc.


Don't get hung up on what professionals do. When you're paid a couple hundred dollars a day, it's worthwhile for a company to spend a day or two worth of your salary to maximize your productivity. It's not unusual for pro developers to have desktop PCs that cost $3000+. It's rare to provide high spec laptops simply because most of the heavy lifting is generally done in the office.


Are you a student? I would not recommend not having a laptop if so.


I am a junior game designer and I'm no longer a student and I got a job. Then for running such game engines like Unity 3D or Unreal Engine or Havok engine and playing games with high specs, Laptops can do such things?


Many of the staff when I ask them about the power differences, they always tell me that a Desktop is always the best to have and a Laptop will easily burst when dealing with games of such power especially 3D games. One of my friends had a powerful laptop that just got busted within 2 years and its all because of the coding that caused it.


Currently I don't use software that requires much of raw power. But I have a feeling that sooner or later I would need such power to work on various softwares such as game engines and its for that reason that I feel that I need a desktop in the long run.

In Topic: Why platform games now focus on unlimited lives?

25 July 2015 - 06:35 PM

Platform games with no lives often tend to break up the game into small, bite-sized chunks of action that require extremely precise execution. Platform games with lives tend to have longer levels that not only test the player's coordination, but also their endurance, and their ability to react to unforseen situations. In games with lives, your performance in one section can have a big impact on the next section- if you burn up most of your lives in the first level of the world, then you'll be walking on eggshells for the rest of the world. In games with no lives, each section is totally independent. Games with lives can feel more coherent, and have a more high-stakes feel due to the possibility of getting sent back a ways if you lose all your lives.


I prefer my platformers to have lives!


That's exactly my point. The mechanic makes you feel alert and makes you want to try it seroiously. Having unlimited lives really doesn't do any of that. It just makes you angry that you have to do the whole section again even if there are checkpoints and the player doesn't feel like learning a lot here.

In Topic: Is Extra Credits reliable to learn Game Design?

22 July 2015 - 05:05 PM

But I do care that their videos are informative and provoke me to think more. In that sense, their videos are immensely helpful to me in thinking through design. For that reason, they are valuable to me.
I also appreciate that they are compact and value-dense. It seems like many videos, articles, blogs, and even books get padded out with additional fluff before getting down to the one or two real insights the creators have - Extra Credits is much better at packing alot of insight into a short amount of time, and presenting it in a clear way.


But they talk stuff like Witcher 3 being the best detective game ever made. How is that even logical to think? Also from what I've heard, most of the research and information that they get are false.

In Topic: Why platform games now focus on unlimited lives?

22 July 2015 - 03:14 PM

Well....I guess time will tell if having lives or not really means a thing. Though personally, it matters to me and I guess I'll have fun playing games with lives instead. I don't see how platformers personally can be fun without lives because there either needs to be an energy bar or a life system.

In Topic: Why platform games now focus on unlimited lives?

20 July 2015 - 03:43 AM


The game will have collectibles that besides getting extra lives, they don't do anything else which makes it WORTH getting which is something LEGENDS DIDN'T DO! I know I'm shouting here but I'm trying to get the point that lives do matter.

I get that lives are important to you, and I (think) that I even understand your reasons, and I won't argue against any of that: I won't tell you that a game would be better for you if lives are removed.


That doesn't mean that a game would not be better for someone else if lives were removed: different people see value in different things, have different perceptions, and different perspectives.


Swiftcoder has indicated that he enjoyed Legends, which seems to imply that either he enjoyed getting the collectibles despite the lack of lives (which argues against your assertion that collectibles are necessarily worthless without lives), or enjoyed the game without bothering with the collectibles (which argues against your assertion that collectibles are important to the enjoyment of a platformer).


Now, it's possible that he would enjoy the game more with the inclusion of lives--but I have no good reason to believe that.


Let me give you an example outside of platforming, from my own experience: I have a somewhat love-hate (or rather "love-frustration") relationship with traditional roguelikes. I love the randomised levels, and being dealt a random "hand" of items with which to play. I really, really don't like to-hit rolls, random damage, respawning monsters, or runs that simply don't seem give me sufficient resources, however. To me, the result feels unfair: I keep losing not because I'm playing poorly, but because the "dice" say so. It's frustrating. I keep feeling that there's a fun game there, if they'd just remove (or, in the case of what items are doled out, "fix") those elements.


But there are other people who love exactly those things: they look at the game as being about management of risk, I gather, and love the feeling that death could be just around the next corner. They come back time and again, and thoroughly enjoy it.


That doesn't mean that I'm wrong, or that they're wrong; it means that they and I are different.


On the point of collectibles, I feel that I've already addressed that: I'm pretty confident that I've given examples of how collectibles might still be useful and interesting in the absence of a "lives" mechanic. Do you have any counterarguments to those points?


In any case, as I've already said: collectibles aren't necessarily the most important element of platformers for all gamers. Personally, I like them, but I don't think that I play platformers for the sake of the collectibles, and none of those that I do find valuable--weapons (and other abilities or powerups) and external rewards (posters, concept art, etc.)--seem to me to rely on lives in any significant way.


Ok then, like I said earlier, if unlimited lives are the future of platform games, then fine. But unless they figure out how to make the game challenging like how lives make them challenging, then its very likely that the game is far easier than what it was suppose to be.

How do lives make collectibles suddenly "worth" getting? There's not usually any in-game reward for collectibles (unless more points is your jam), and the value of extra content like concept art and stuff  differs from player to player. I would say that most people getting collectibles in a platformer do it for the sense of accomplishment that comes with obtaining them, especially the ones in hard to get places. Lives do not make this feeling more (or less) valuable to the player.


Items are there around you. Wouldn't you as a player would like to collect things that give you something in return? Of course and that's why getting lives is part of collecting because they want to.