Heya Guys,

Thanks for your feedback, positive or negative it's nice to know that people are still checking in occasionally. I did, however, want to respond to some of the feedback I got.

Yes, it's possible that I'm aiming too high, but most people do to one degree or another.

I'm curious, however, what people use to gauge "too high", "too low", or "just right." Part of the purpose of this experiment is to dispel people's negativism and tendency to discourage others...always regurgitating the "uhh, start small, maybe pong, tetris, zelda...work your way up. Eventually you'll be able to find a hobbyist team and do something real...but take it slowly..." quote that I see so often in For Beginners.

Are people thinking that I'm aiming too high because the features would be difficult to implement for you or someone you know, because you've heard others say these would be difficult features to implement, or because you've seen my code and work-habits before and thus are extrapolating that these might be too high for me this time? I don't want this to come across as sarcasm. I'm genuinely interested in why people believe I "...might be aiming too high...".

Quote:I'd personally be extremely impressed if your Mini-MORPG just had Zelda: Link to the Past type graphics and combat...

Well, then be prepared to be dazzled and amazed. [lol] Trapper's right, I don't need all this stuff to make the game great. But part of the purpose of this is for me to get something out of it as well. And to do that, I need to push the envelope of my own skill set.

Quote:...Please don't take this to be discouraging; I'm following your progress with enthusiasm.

I don't personally take it as discouraging. However, I can see how a junior programmer faced with "I think you might be aiming a little too high..." might take that as discouraging. I'd like to see a lot more people on GDNet offering advice on ways to help people realize their vision, rather than trying to convince them their vision is too grand. For example, how's my feature analysis progressing? Are there components missing? What questions have I not yet answered? etc....

If someone has a clearly defined path before them, try and help them make the journey, don't suggest detours or alternate routes.

Quote:Considering the technicality of it, obtaining the different styles of movement such as jumping, swimming, tumbling, etc, these are 95% based on simply adding some new animation sequences with certain rotations applied, aren't they?

For the most part, the appearance of climbing, jumping, swimming, etc...are far more difficult to implement than the reality of it. I can make a cube move vertically up the side of a hill, up a rope, etc...I can make a cube jump up and down, and I can even make a cube move through a space at a slower speed, with a non-existent or decreased impact from gravity (swimming). Once these are possible, then it's just a matter of creating/applying appropriate animations to each.

Jumping: An impulse force is applied upwards, which causes the person to be launched into the air, only to be brought down again by gravity.

Swimming: Reduce gravity to a small or non-existent amount, and allow the character to descend deeper or raise higher based on camera angle.

Tumbling: This is just a sideways movement with animation, which might have increased defensive bonuses over just moving or jumping.

Climbing: This is just changing the local axis of movement at certain locations. Normally forward means ...wait for it...forward, however when on a rope, forward could be used to mean up, etc...alternatively, the jump button, while under/against a climbable surface can mean to advance up the surface rather than to actually jump. This would leave the movement analog stick free to implement such things as "swinging" on a rope.

At any rate. I thank everyone who's providing feedback. It is good to know people are following this. I'm half doing it to practice my analysis, design, implementation, and optimization skills....but I'm also half doing it because I enjoy the community's involvement. A project like this is much less entertaining to write when no one's watching it go from analysis to completion.

I wonder if GDNet would host this MiniMORPG when it gets completed. Might be nice to have an online game community, similar to the way we have an IRC channel. Everyone could meet in one of the major cities and chat, while taking quests, etc...Given that it's C#, we could even use reflection with a well-defined interface to allow contributors to develop their own mods and add-ons for the game. Just a thought. [wink]

/discuss