Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Member Since 09 Jul 2012
Offline Last Active Dec 22 2014 10:25 AM

#5117430 Cool Feature to Add a Little Challenge or Pain in the Buttocks

Posted by on 16 December 2013 - 03:27 PM

If there is no failure penalty, there is little sense of fulfillment on success.  Knowing that you AVOIDED the penalty is a great reward.  Using the example you cited, I thought the idea of injuries in Dragon Age was great.  If all players just resurrected after fights with no consequences the player would have no motivation to keep them alive.  With that system, you move low health players away from the fight or try to heal them.  It makes surviving fights without any KOs much more rewarding.


Of course, like everything in life, the key is finding the sweet spot for player punishment.  Sometimes just having to reload a game is punishment enough and sometimes you need to go full Dark Souls and make the player want to throw her console out the window.

#5111284 Making music via software?

Posted by on 22 November 2013 - 09:11 AM

I have a super cheap midi keyboard that I use.  It's not the best but when your budget is $0 you can't really afford anything nicer.  I always have more luck playing the notes on a keyboard as opposed to adding them to a software program with a mouse.



#5107168 I'm stuck, haven't gotten any better at programming in months

Posted by on 05 November 2013 - 08:58 AM



I try to watch this every day.  It's amazing how this 2 minutes motivates me to keep working on my games.




Finishing is a skill.  ANYONE can make 4-5 incomplete games.  Very few people can actually finish one.

#5067880 Strategy Game - Unit Damage

Posted by on 06 June 2013 - 01:24 PM

Wow.  Some really great stuff guys.  I like the idea of a slight variance possibly being the difference between a unit living or dying, whereas set damage would cause the unit to live or die every time.  I also feel that the variance should be relatively small to enable this situation occasionally, but not large enough to win battles based on luck.  Due to this I have come up with a new damage formula.  I added some unit advantages for more variance and strategic reasons.


Base unit damage * (95%-105%) * field location bonus/penalty * strategic points controlled bonus * slight total number of allies bonus


The field location bonus is based on terrain and where the fight is occurring on the battlefield.  Strategic points are areas on the battlefield that a team can capture to generate bonuses for their units, and the number of allies bonus is a partial solution to my number of units on screen at a time problem.  (I can only support so many units so I have a reserve system.  The current units on the field get a slight morale bonus based on the number of reserves available.)


With all of the variance do you think I even need the 95%-105% randomness?

#5067701 Bad Code

Posted by on 05 June 2013 - 03:28 PM

Are you coding by yourself or in a team?  I used to have the same worries you do, then I realized that I'm the only person who works on my code so who cares?  The end result is all that matters for me.  Of course, I don't know what type of code you are writing.  I use a game engine and how I write my code makes little difference to the performance.

#5065833 Strategy Game - Unit Damage

Posted by on 29 May 2013 - 09:33 AM

Which would you rather have in a strategy game?

- Fixed unit damage (ie 8 HP per hit)

- Unit damage range (ie 6-10 HP per hit)


My thoughts:

Randomness always concerns me in gaming.  I don't want a player to feel like they lost due to luck.  Because of this, I currently have fixed damage.  HOWEVER, I have been thinking about games like Axis and Allies or Risk and how terrible they would be if there were no dice rolls.  If the team with the most units won every time, you would lose the drama of underdog victories or crushing defeats.  The outcome of battles would be predetermined by the team with the most powerful (or most) units.


What are everyone's thoughts on this?  Should there be some randomness to attack damage or should it be fixed?  Should the team that goes in with the advantage win every time or should there be a chance for an upset?

#5042851 Group Design software suggestions

Posted by on 13 March 2013 - 03:25 PM


#5024373 What are the different ways for finding new game concepts?

Posted by on 22 January 2013 - 12:04 PM

The best way to come up with ideas for games is to play games.  While playing a game, think about what YOU would have done to make it better or a feature that you think you could improve on.


Another popular thing these days are reboots of older games.  What was your favorite game as a kid?  I liked a game called Fantasy Empires that had a lot of original ideas in it.  There hasn't really been a game like it since it came out in 1993.  I think a modernized version would be awesome.


I also have ideas for games based on books, movies, or tv shows.  Want to create an RPG?  Read some fantasy novels.  A zombie game?  Read World War Z.


You can't really search for inspiration, it just sort of happens when you are least expecting it.

#5024370 How does "insalling" a game work?

Posted by on 22 January 2013 - 11:55 AM

Just make sure to program your game to save data correctly! It doesn't go in the program folder, it goes into the user's proper folder for saving program save data and settings.

Mhm... why would this be "correct" way to save data?


I know allot games do save "save files" in "my documents" folder or "my documens/Games".

Googling provided little info on this matter.

Many people don't want to remove their savegames when they uninstall a game.  Keeping them separate from the actual game folder provides an easy way to allow uninstall/reinstall without losing any savegames.


Edit:  Also, I would highly suggest using NSIS as Daaark suggested.  I've created multiple installers using it and the scripting is very powerful.

#5007538 What are various ways to "do evil/bad" or "do good" in a game?

Posted by on 05 December 2012 - 03:56 PM

I think what you are trying to do is very interesting. I like the fact that you don't automatically resort to violence as the good/evil separation as too many games resort to this, ie finish quest and either kill NPC or not.

The entire concept of good/evil has its roots in religion so you could try to base some of the decisions on that. You could have levels based on the seven deadly sins (of course, lust might make the game pretty adult) or look at the ten commandments. Good is actually harder to portray than evil because a lot of being good is simply NOT doing evil things.

#4962597 [Weekly Discussion] on RPG Genre's flaws - Week 5 : "Accessibility"

Posted by on 24 July 2012 - 07:45 AM

A lot of what you are talking about is creating games that appeal to more than just fans of the genre. I personally don't think this is important at all, but then I'm a hobbyist. I will never make money on my games. I want to create a game for fans of the type I'm creating. If people want more action, then don't play my game. Too many RPGs are dumbing themselves down to appeal to the ADD/ADHD crowd. Dragon Age was one of my favorite games. Dragon Age 2 was a terrible, terrible betrayal. Mass Effect 1 was a decent RPG. Mass Effect 2 and 3 are not even RPGs. They are slow moving, cinematic action games. (I know those aren't JRPGs but I think the example applies.)

I understand that large software companies want to make as much money as possible and you do this by appealing to a larger market but I feel this makes games WORSE.

If you are more interested in the animation your character performs than the damage amount displayed, you shouldn't be playing an RPG.

That's just my 2 cents.

#4960535 Inventory Screens...

Posted by on 18 July 2012 - 10:32 AM

If you don't have stats (assuming this is an rpg) on the other portion of the inventory screen, I would put those somewhere. People like to be able to see the immediate results of equipping/unequipping items.

#4960102 [Weekly Discussion] on RPG Genre's flaws - Week 4 : "Exploration]"

Posted by on 17 July 2012 - 12:34 PM

Well... Here's a few examples that I'm aware of:

Mystic Quest simplified world map navigation to barebone arrow pointing (so you could just move from area to area ala Mario). It kinda sucked as a result.

Bahamut Lagoon was a tactical rpg, and as such, it couldn't really do with regular worldmap movement or movement at all, but they've actually had this rather lenghty sessions of exploration and mini-games (feed the dragons, etc) so as to avoid being repetitive. To me, it kinda 'saved the game' from being dull and repetitive.

From my experience, I'd say exploration is a vital part of making RPGs less repetitive and more fun. The best compliment you can make about exploration is that you haven't noticed it (there wasn't too much or too little to do in-between fights).

It sounds like your big concern is that without exploration the game would get repetitive as a cycle of fight, heal, shop would get old very quick. I hadn't really thought about this and I agree with you. I think varying the fights up will help, but you should still let the player "take a break" from the fighting routine every once in awhile.

Do you think these breaks have to be exploration based? What if in between encounters you did something else other than explore to break the monotony?

#4959620 [Weekly Discussion] on RPG Genre's flaws - Week 4 : "Exploration]"

Posted by on 16 July 2012 - 09:37 AM

Exactly how important is exploration to a RPG?

I'm considering having very little (or no) exploration in my game. The quest system is setup more similar to RTS campaigns. The game takes place during a war and most of the "quests" are battles where you travel to a single large, drawn out encounter. There might be a little bit of exploring an area before the battle and preparation but not much. Between battles you walk around base camp to heal, talk to NPCs, shop, etc.

How do you guys feel about this? Is exploration a vital part of RPGs that will be sorely missed?

#4958390 Weekly Discussion on RPG Genre's flaws [Week 3 : Attrition]

Posted by on 12 July 2012 - 07:28 AM

These fights are clearly easy, can be won with only 1 button press, but they are fun !!! they show you your power.

I suppose this varies by player. My brother turns on God mode in games and plays through the whole thing without dying and has a blast. I can't do this. I played through the first 2 Fable games and I didn't die. That's not very fun for me. I'm sure certain players enjoy it. I guess I want to cater my game to the more "hardcore" players. The ones that want a game to punish them over and over until they finally win by the skin of their teeth. Once again, this feeling varies greatly between players. I will definitely lose out on the more casual market that some games have been dumbing themselves down for (I'm looking at you D3 and DA:2)

I agree with you on wanting to see your character's power though. Part of the enjoyment of leveling up is gaining an ability that gives you a new advantage over your enemies. I think you can have some weak characters in a difficult encounter that let you see this. For example, with my new skill I can now kill bandits with one hit. Should I kill all of the bandits in the next encounter first? Should I freeze the "tough" enemy and then kill the bandits?

I believe a player can still feel dominant over certain enemies in a difficult encounter and get that feeling of being a powerful character.