Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


HelloSkitty

Member Since 27 Jun 2011
Offline Last Active Apr 09 2013 04:54 PM
-----

#4946503 Your first game idea - What happened to it?

Posted by HelloSkitty on 05 June 2012 - 10:44 AM

Idea: RPG/Strategy/Adventure (Like Legend of Zelda) based on Alchemical Elements

How Far: Still Developing

Evolving:
I first had this idea about 2 years ago. At that time, I had just learned the basics of graphics with java. I got as far as map movement and bullet collision. Then I decided that it was too much work and scraped it, roughly one year ago.
Then, about the beginning of this year, I learned new techniques in java that would help me with the project, but didn't want to work with the old code, so rewrote from scratch. I altered the part about Alchemical Elements to instead be colors, and decided to shape the world as a fractal. I've also recruited a friend to help the project along.

Lessons:
1. Don't abandon your ideas. Give them the respect they deserve, and while at first the idea my not seem like much, you can mold it on the meta-physical anvil to always become better.
2. Get people interested in your project, because if it's a big project and nobody knows about it, you might spontaneously forget about it.
3. Designing can be just as fun as playing.
4. Do not focus on only one project if you burn out easily. If you alternate between different projects, you will tire less easily, especially if they are different types of games. Its like crop rotations to preserve soil nutrients.
5. If you haven't fully designed the game, code from bottom up to leave flexibility.
6. if you have fully designed the game, code from top down so you know how far you are to completion.
7. Coding a game is not as easy as closing your eyes and seeing it.

How it Would Be Now:
It is now.



And Ashaman73, you just inspired me to follow my Lesson #1 by 20% more then before :D


#4903331 Operator Precedence

Posted by HelloSkitty on 16 January 2012 - 01:32 PM

I think what is means is if you have the following line:

x=2*x++; //x=5 before execution

It will evaluate the ++ (postfix) first, which says increase the value of x after this line is executed.
Then it will do the multiplication, (2*x=10)
And then assign the new value to x (10).
Then, the postfix kicks in, increasing x by one (11).

If, on the other hand, the * had precedence over the ++, it would try to do (2*x)++. This is like writing
2*x=2*x*1 (You can't assign a value to a non-variable).

Executing a postfix expression like x++; is not saying "increase the value of x by one", it is saying "after this line executes, increase x by one".


Or just look at parentheses, which is equivalent to 2*x++

(2*x)++ // * takes precedence over ++
or
2*(x++) // ++ takes precedence over *


#4870964 Is This Game a Winner? Why? Why Not?

Posted by HelloSkitty on 09 October 2011 - 10:46 PM

I saw a similar post on this site called To Grid or Not To Grid -- That is the Question.

Which led me to the same page ya'll seen. I immediately realized it was textbased, and as stereotypes go, BORING. But the artsy picture in the background looked nice, which is why I joined it. So I'll explain what this game is, for oldbard.

I've attached a screenshot. I will say that the UI is very nicely designed. Now. Mechanics.

There is a Grid. And on this Grid are squares. To control the grid, one must own every square on it. The goal is to control the grid. Simple?

Now. Specifics. Each account and each square has characteristics, which I'll briefly list and explain.

Grid Square Characteristics:
Units: They fight for you. Invade other squares and seize control of them.
Farms: They produce gold, not food. They are gold farms.
Cities: Cities breed people. People like to fight, and they become units.
Rebels: They don't like this square. They steal your gold, and they cause mutinies, meaning soldiers leave.
Walls: Walls are good protection. You can shoot arrows from above, and it stops people from infiltrating the square to burn the farms.

Personal Characteristics:
Gold: Money. It buys stuff. Stealable.
Clout: Odd name for how many alliances you have. It matters very little.
Bank: Like gold, but it's safe.
Umbrella: It's like a wall, but its aerial. It shields from nukes and firestorms. But not from soldier invasions.


That is all there is to it. Now, at first glance, the features are very... shall I say... lacking of flavor. But while playing this game, I realized there was something to it that most other games lack. Everything, EVERYTHING, is ephemeral. Other games, you have permanent stuff, i.e. items that don't degrade. The only permanent thing here is the bank, which, if you withdraw money from it, isn't permanent. Anti-permanence means that it is easier for the newer folk to "catch up" to those who have lived in the grid a longer time. Which is useful considering the grid has only 350 squares or so. Also, it is very difficult to focus one taking down one person, as the tools of greatest destruction target random squares. Including one's own squares. It makes it easier to target those who have the most squares, keeping the balance of power in check.

What else do I like about the grid... it's volatility. Had I posted this a few weeks back, the characteristic section would look a lot similar, but without cities, walls, rebels, or a bank. New features are added, not at a lightning velocity, but fast. It helps keep things interesting.

What else to I like about the grid. It's an MMO, without the first M. The number of active people doesn't stray far from 10. It means everybody gets to know each other.

That said, a few things could be improved. There is no comprehensive guide to all of the features, so they all must be learned slowly, with little aid.

Some Features:

Burn: Calls down a firestorm on a random square on the grid. A random number of farms on this square are hit, and they burn away. Walls shield some of the fire. So does an umbrella.
Nuke: Replace firestorm with nuke, farms with cities, fire with nuke.
Havok: Replace firestorm with biohazard, farms with units, burn with unlive, fire with destruction.
Rebel: Put a rebel on a square of choice, remove a rebel from a square of choice, or pay a rebel of chosen square to leave.
Blitz: Pick a neighboring square. Attack it. If it has 0 units, you get it.
Wall: Build a wall around a square.
Umbrella: Buy an umbrella.
Bless: 1/100 chance to succeed. Gives a random amount of money to everyone.
Steal: 1/10 chance to succeed. Steals money from someone of choice.
Gamble: Double or nothing.
Farm: Build a farm. Cost is 100*Number of Farms+100
City: Replace farm with city.
Alliance: Make an alliance with someone. Cost is 50*Number of allies+50.
Bank: Deposit or withdraw money. Cost to deposit increases if you have more money in bank.

The part I like about farms, cities, alliances, and bank deposit costs, are that they put a soft cap on the amount of "stuff" someone can have on the grid. Nobody can become too powerful.

Rebels work based on percentages. They will have a stronger effect on a stronger square. A weaker player will care very little about rebels, but a stronger player will be racing to remove them before they cause too much damage.

Blessings increase everybody's wealth by a constant, meaning newer people become closer to the higher ups.

I consider it a social game, for this reason. Everyone is mostly equal once they get the hang of the game. There is a degree of strategy used, and there is a small competitive aspect to it, but the way to succeed hinges on diplomacy with other players, rather then abiding by some conquestual strategy. This is why, if you look at the screenshot, there is a box labeled YAK.

A few things help reduce the competitiveness of the game:

1 There is a small amount of lag during grid updates. It means that you cannot see the result of something you've done immediately. A slow pace makes everything easier to react to. Although, I do know that this lag was not intended by the developer.

2 A monochrome grid is artistically boring. That is how the grid would look of someone had complete control of it.

3 GRID NEWS. In the screenshot, someone is seen having won an amount of gold through a gamble. GRID NEWS displays quotes about the grid and griddlecakes, as well as displaying events occuring that involve high numbers. Everything is transparent. Everybody knows how much money everybody has in the bank. If you move 1000 units from square 4 to square 10, people will know. There is no stealth.


So, that is the grid. This was by no means organized, but it explains the general gist of it.

(Edited to actually include the screenshot)

Attached Thumbnails

  • Grid.png



#4850126 Do overused monsters disappoint or annoy you?

Posted by HelloSkitty on 16 August 2011 - 08:54 PM

I sort of like having to start out fighting little rats that are easy to kill. If you start by teaching someone how to fight something like a one eyed purple flying unicorn, it gives a slight impression of unrealism, and almost specialization. Something unique will have unique strengths and weaknesses the player will have to pick up on later, but the first few missions whose purpose is to teach someone how to use the attack button should not also expect someone to remember that "to kill a purple flying cyclops unicorn, play the note on your flute corresponding to the blue button, then etc."

Also, as a game progresses, enemies typically get more outrageous and flashy, forcing the player to continue just to see "what kind of monstrosity could the designer come up with that's better than this monster?" Starting off against exotic monsters implies a lesser degree of gradient between exoticness of a monster, which could lead to boredom.

One thing to watch for, however, is excessive "teaching", or slateness. One game made me kill hundreds of armadillos using a bow and arrow (as a tutorial on attacking) before progressing to the next point in the story. Needless to say, 5 or 10 would suffice for teaching how to right click something. Don't force the player to focus on only one "stale enemy". Give them a choice between goblins, rats, tumble-weeds, orange slimes, etc as possible training subjects. If they can make a pet out of a defeated monster, rather than only having "get a pet rat" as a tutorial, different people will prefer a slime as a first pet, or a goblin servant.

Khaiy says it well

For my part, I don't mind more common monsters provided that there are plentiful alternatives as well.




#4828405 Advertising

Posted by HelloSkitty on 27 June 2011 - 03:00 PM

I've been thinking about developing a game, and while I've done nothing about it yet, I am interested in what happens after the development process is complete, assuming that the game in question is one you want to get money off of. Also assuming that the development process was not funded (so you were working on the project in your own time, and have no funds to advertise formally). I find it hard to believe that word-of-mouth is that effective a method of advertisement, yet there are many popular software (and even non-computer-related-stuff i.e. silly bands were apparently really popular a few months back and were never advertised) that became popular by word of mouth alone. Is it really that effective, or is there some other (money-less) way for an independent developer to make their name?


#4828379 Where does the Troll start?

Posted by HelloSkitty on 27 June 2011 - 01:48 PM

Deindividualization and anonymity will expose human nature. Secretly, I think we all have some troll on the inside that we just don't show, because if we were to show our troll in public, people would simply avoid us.

Story: I have 3 cats, and starting with the first, every time another cat was introduced to the house, they took weeks to stop hating each other. Animals don't know how to hide their inner troll. That's why those from the same species hate each other (family excluded). Ignore the wolves. Humans got together to create civilization because they eventually learned to hide their troll, and make friends. But even after these thousands of years, the inner troll remains. Anonymity freed it from its prison. But I digress.

In mmo games, there are options given that allow you to follow a specific person without their knowledge (example: runescape), and in rts-team games, you're stuck on a team with someone else (example: dota). Over the internet, there is no face attached behind your username, its just the words. Trolling over the net will not bring you real-world consequences, so people are more apt to reveal their troll, it's just a matter of how.

Trolling seems to create a certain feeling of superiority if emotional explosions are created in targets. I too am guilty of trolling, but I, rather than using my own teammates as targets, use the enemy team. Expert mastery of the all-chat box allows me to give "tips" to those on other teams of lesser skill, and nobody likes being told how to play. If they explode at me with "stfu noob", well, I just exposed them for the rager they are, and if they accept the advice graciously, I'll know who to friend after.


PARTNERS