• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
lerno

The case against non-topdown strategy games?

7 posts in this topic

I was thinking of having a novel perspective for the world map in our upcoming strategy/MMO, with the perspective ending up very close to this:

[sharedmedia=core:attachments:8587]

From prototyping, the tiles would end up twice as wide as they were high. Then I read [url="http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=21174"]this article[/url] which mentioned Civ 4 opting for a 3D top-down style map because the isometric map of Civ 2 was considered more difficult for the user to determine distances.

I realized the same problem would apply to our game if we stuck to this perspective.

Now question is: how serious is this problem? I expect the current perspective will be more atmospheric, but if it's too hard to understand we should scrap it as soon as possible. Has anyone done a more thorough analysis of this? Perhaps someone could guide me to some other articles?

Is top down the best (and only) choice here?
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not sure I understand why having wide squares would be a problem? I don't think there is anything to prevent you from strategy game based on rectangles. it might be because I don't know what kind of game you are making. Is it rts? is the picture related?

If you tiles are twice as wide, simply divide all y-axis movement and range calculation by 2.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Programmatically it's not an issue. If you read the article, they talk about the conceptual difficulty for players to judge distance on an isometric map. Basically, will the user have difficulty estimating optimal movement/strategy because of the asymmetry between north-south and east-west movement?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If it's a real time strategy game (or anything not turn based, really) you could sort of cheat by adopting a 3/4s straight on view, like the old Legend of Zelda or Pokemon games. The player moves at the same speed no matter which way they are going, but objects and people are drawn from the side. Not strictly realistic if you really think about, but it looks good and seems like a possible compromise between top down and isometric.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it depends on a few factors:
- How important are distances in your game? If it's more about connectivity of points, then it's less of an issue.
- How quickly and how often do players need to make distance calculations? If they don't need to make them that fast or often, then you can just display the distance on the map.

Personally I like the perspective of an isometric map - the advantage of it is that you can display a greater area (assuming it's 2D or relatively flat) than a top-down view, so although distance might be harder to calculate, the player might have a better strategic understanding of the game. Plus it might save you from having to code a new view, like a zoomed out map view etc.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think top down beats all. To figure out what is best for you though, set up a chess board and then move around looking at it and figure out what angle is best. To me, straight over head wins out for clarity of options and minimal hiding of units and important options. Your solutions may vary.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Bill_H' timestamp='1342574844' post='4960284']
If it's a real time strategy game (or anything not turn based, really) you could sort of cheat by adopting a 3/4s straight on view, like the old Legend of Zelda or Pokemon games. The player moves at the same speed no matter which way they are going, but objects and people are drawn from the side. Not strictly realistic if you really think about, but it looks good and seems like a possible compromise between top down and isometric.
[/quote]

Actually, when I say top-down, this is the perspective I'm thinking about. A true top-down would make map features hard to make out.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Sarmon' timestamp='1343087241' post='4962406']
I think it depends on a few factors:
- How important are distances in your game? If it's more about connectivity of points, then it's less of an issue.
- How quickly and how often do players need to make distance calculations? If they don't need to make them that fast or often, then you can just display the distance on the map.
Personally I like the perspective of an isometric map - the advantage of it is that you can display a greater area (assuming it's 2D or relatively flat) than a top-down view, so although distance might be harder to calculate, the player might have a better strategic understanding of the game. Plus it might save you from having to code a new view, like a zoomed out map view etc.
[/quote]

The game is practically about moving a single unit about the map, so it's definitely something central to the game. It's also essential that a player takes one step at a time, as you only see armies camped in the same location as your own unit. So basically you take one step, then see if there's something there, then the next. I mean, you don't set a route or take multiple steps at a time.

The usual "isometric" with directions in NW/NE/SW/SE feels a little weird when movement's only allowed in the cardinal directions. I strongly prefer north to point up. That said, the isometric perspective is extremely attractive.

The map perspective I initially intended would also be very nice, but has the drawback of asymmetry between N-S and E-W directions.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0