Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


PyroDragn

Member Since 18 Apr 2012
Offline Last Active Nov 19 2013 06:38 PM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: What would you design if you had UNLIMTED funding?

11 April 2013 - 06:23 AM

I thought I did answer it (at least the one in the post). I was rather clear in saying: Don't do that. (... or so I thought?)

 

There were two different questions to hand:

 

"what would you design if you had funding?"

 

and

 

"what do you suggest I do with my cousin's offer?"

 

You answered the second by saying "don't do it" but the first question, and the one in the title of the post, you didn't answer at all, so I guess that Mratthew is technically correct in that respect.

 

I have to sort of disagree with your answer of "don't do it" though. I'm sure everyone would agree that you shouldn't waste the money, but that would hold true whether it came from family, or another funder. He doesn't seem to have experience, so he needs to be careful, he needs to do a lot of planning, but no-one goes in to any investment planning to fail.

 

Millionaires aren't millionaires because they just throw away their money, sure. But not all families are entirely unforgiving, or entirely capitalist in their intentions. The idea that a rich family member may be offering a small cash injection in order to get a family member on their way in a venture they enjoy isn't exactly an impossibility.

 

The important thing is to find out what is being offered, and the terms for the offer. How much is it? Is it a loan, gift, or investment? What does your cousin want in return? I don't know anything about the parties involved, so there's no basis for judgements. The sentiment to be careful with your family's money, makes sense. To say "don't do it because if you don't make any money then your family will be angry with you forever" is entirely speculative. 


In Topic: What would you design if you had UNLIMTED funding?

11 April 2013 - 01:26 AM

Are the artists on board friends of yours, or are they people you have met online/recruited?

 

Who is going to be in charge of the design?

 

If the artists are your friends, then they probably expect some say in what project you go forward with. Even if they're not, you'll want to try and make something that they would be interested in (and therefore more motivated to complete). The most annoying thing that can happen is to start developing a game, and then have the team fall apart because of lack of interest.

 

You've never programmed AI before, are you therefore expecting to start with something with simple AI to learn? or to jump right in to learning complex AI programming? Get someone else in to help? or to make a game with no AI at all?

 

If this is your first project (it seems like it is) then you want to aim small. A lot of people jump right in with 'their ultimate team' to create 'the ultimate ultra-super MMO that will revolutionize the industry.' That's just not going to happen if you've never made a game before. A simple puzzle game is your best bet if making something without any AI, or some kind of directly competitive multiplayer game (so you only play versus other people, rather than any AI).

 

Designing a brand new puzzle game is not easy, and another rehash of a Chain Reaction or Bubble Pop game isn't going to net you much in the way of value or getting on steam - it might be a consideration if you're more interested in the experience at this point, which is a viable route to be taking. A competitive multiplayer game is probably easier to come up with a concept for, but going to be harder to program (in terms of networking and sending/receiving data, although local only multiplayer would be easier).

 

The questions right now would be, what do you (and your other team members) like to play? What sort of artwork are your artists used to working with? (if they work with 2D sprites, then designing a full 3D modeled game may be out of their league for example). Having possible funding is great. Wasting it is not.

 

Give some more information on what would you like to build, and maybe we can help brainstorm things through with you.


In Topic: Game concept

18 March 2013 - 09:20 AM

Your post so far as said "I want to make a game with things which do things." Is this workable? Sure. Almost every game has things which do things. Is there much else to say besides that? Not until you give more detail.


In Topic: [Problem] The game is being 'fed' to the player

19 February 2013 - 07:02 AM

As Sporniket said above, one possibility is to have multiple outcomes - ie, the choices of the player affect the outcome.

 

This would increase the workload quite a bit in determining plot. Multiple outcomes/choices means multiple paths and more writing. This does also have the benefit of increasing replayability however, since the player can play again and make a different choice.

 

Alternative to this is to consider multiple paths to the same outcome. This would mean less writing in terms of storyline, but still a greater portrayed freedom to the player. As a very basic example; In order to progress the player needs to cross a river, get through a locked door, and past a troll. He has a rope, a golden key, and an axe.

 

1. He uses the rope to cross the river, unlocks the door with the key, kills the troll with the axe

2. He uses the rope to cross the river, smashes his way through the door with the axe, bribes his way past the troll with the key

3. He fells a tree across the river with the axe, unlocks the door with the key, sets up a snare to trap the troll with the rope

4. He fells a tree across the river, ties the rope to the door - and a boulder - then pushes the boulder off a cliff to yank the door open, he bribes his way past the troll with the golden key.

5. He uses the key to pay for a ferry to take him across the river, smashes his way through the door with the axe, sets up a snare to trap the troll with the rope

6. He uses the key to pay for a ferry to take him across the river, ties the rope to the door - and a boulder - then pushes the boulder off a cliff to yank the door open, kills the troll with the axe.

 

This shows the same three items, in the same three scenes, used in a multitude of options. The key to not feeding the player the story is to allow the player the essence of choice, even if those choices prove essentially meaningless. If the player has a choice between climbing a wall, or going through a gate, then it seems better to the player even if they both (eventually) lead to the same point inside the castle.


In Topic: Process of a video game

28 January 2013 - 01:53 PM

I would want the enviroments done first. Characters, props etc. and everything in full 3D. then then the programmers.

 

 

when should the sound design come into play?

 

Having the environments and everything modeled in full 3D before you get the programmers in is usually - again, depending on the game - going to be a problem. There's not usually much point in modelling everything if you don't have a basis for the physics, the engine, collision detection, etc. If you're using, for example, the Unreal 3 engine then perhaps you could start doing modelling before you get other programmers in, but that's because a large chunk of the programming has already been done beforehand.


PARTNERS