• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

105 Neutral

About Boallods

  • Rank
  1. Games are art.

    [quote name='Net Gnome' timestamp='1330110757'] @Servant of the Lord: Its not that i need the government to tell me what is art, its the recognition that it is art and therefore is awarded protections under law. That is what is important: the legal guards of being classified as a protected by the 1st amendment. Its what allows us to continue artistic freedoms without worrying about reprisal from "offended" sources. [/quote] I agree with him. Anyway, we did not see games as art before this. To be honest, I lol-ed first time I saw that article.
  2. [quote name='qis' timestamp='1330128377' post='4916387'] Hello, Even though I'm working on a project that has nothing to do with games, I figured this is still a good place to ask an advice about one game design issue I'm having. I'm just wodering what approach you guys (especially experienced "big" games programmers) use when balancing a game with hundreds of variables. For example, games like Civilization, Heroes, Starcraft, etc, etc, have different units with different stats, and the question is, how are all these variables calculated to make them "balanced". Do you guys "handwrite" all the math formulas and such how those variables interact with each other and mathematically solve the values? Or is it an intensive testing for different options? Are there any software to help you with that? I'm making a software that has tons of variables that interact with each other and figured I would ask about your experiences before I simple add semi-random values to them and start playing around trying to find the best match. Thanks. [/quote] its almost impossible to perfectly balance the game. for example in RTS yu need to give every race units with great attack, units with great HP etc. yu need to make ever race "wanted" to be played. In SC for example, zergs are the ones that use their numbers. prottoses, however, use their powerful shields.
  3. Games are art.

    Read this article first please: http://articles.cnn....etel?_s=PM:TECH So, the bottom line is; Video games are art. That means that all game devs are, well, artists. I think the games deserve to be called art, because everyone (ok not a new born baby, but almost everybody) can make games. Indie gaming had grown much in last two years, with all those game engines that require no money or programming skills to make games (GameSalad, Stencyl). Those engines allow gamers to become game devs, without learning almost anything and bring their games in PC, Mac, Android, mobiles and other devices. Some companies are actually emerging right now from few inspired game devs. Some games (the perfect example is Angry Birds) are madly popular. This one earned more then Grand Turismo did. One more advantage of the indie gaming is that you can make simple and addicting flash games quickly. One AAA game (like Grand Turismo) does earn a lot, but the cost of hundreds of programmers, modelers, animators etc. is not something that indies can afford. Indie devs do everything. They make up the design, do all the scripting, modeling.... So, the conclusion is that one game dev can be compared to Leonardo da Vinci. Tell my what you think about this topic, can not wait to hear it!
  4. 2D engine for Kongregate?

    [quote name='lmbarns' timestamp='1330045164' post='4916043'] Never used this product but I've seen it mentioned in a couple communities, allegedly it doesn't require much coding [url=""][/url] I like html5 with javascript for 2d or Unity with c# for 3d but both of those require coding. I got my old android phone to load a 50,000 tile (64x64 pixel tiles), generated map with html5 but it only had 4 fps, on PC i can generate a 250,000 tile map while still maintaining 140-250 fps depending on the size of the canvas, despite all the negativity about html5 performance. Google's V8 engine converts javascript to machine code at run-time making it very fast, they created a plugin to run V8 in IE giving you HTML5 capabilities in IE6 onwards if you can get users to install the plugin "chrome frame". They're working on versions for the other browsers as well. I'd say it will only get better in the future... Lots of engines allow html5 development, kongregate does allow html5 games. It may be a good path to get started [url=""][/url] [/quote] Game salad only works on Mac. [quote name='vladimirsan' timestamp='1330047832' post='4916057'] I'm using as3 and [url=""]flashpunk[/url]. I feel that flashpunk does almost all of the stuff and that I just have to focus on graphics and gameplay...well that is just how I feel but I still think that you should try again AS3 with flashpunk (maybe using [url=""]flashdevelop[/url]) [/quote] I really prefer no scripting. [quote name='meeshoo' timestamp='1330035305' post='4915995'] Indeed you are right. If you know exactly what games you want to make and what you would need for such game types (and make over 250$ which is your initial spending with iOS dev account + stencyl subscription per year) it might work. Let us know about your progress. [/quote] You do not have to pay stencyl to publish games on the web (PC) . I will move on other platforms later.
  5. 2D engine for Kongregate?

    [quote name='meeshoo' timestamp='1330007312' post='4915870'] Is there any particular reason why you want to stay away from scripting? I mean it is not like you would work in C and have to manage memory or something, learning a script language can be pretty easy and will give you many benefits in the long run. Visual scripting could be Ok for simple things, but you will never be able to do a complex game without programming, because games are software that manipulate data first and foremost, with the particular aspect that the data are usually 3d models, pictures and audio samples. You cannot develop software without programming. [/quote] stencyl looks flexible enough for games I want to make. I also want to make games fast, without looking in dozens of lines of codes to find a mistake I made. I already tried scripting and it did not went well. yu do not need any scripting to make 2d games. I want to focus on quality of graphics and gameplay.
  6. 2D engine for Kongregate?

    [quote name='meeshoo' timestamp='1329913814' post='4915471'] Stencyl also has some scripting, I think it is action script. But how do you know they are not flexible enough for your game if you haven't tested them first? [/quote] stencyl has visual scripting, as far as I see. 2.0 version will be based on events. and I saw their features and how they work. just not the right thing for me.
  7. 2D engine for Kongregate?

    [quote name='NickGomes' timestamp='1329837901' post='4915180'] I'm not sure if Kongregate allows submission of HTML 5 games but if they do then you can make games with Construct 2 or GameMaker. Construct 2 is a little less flexible but easier to learn where as GameMaker is more powerful but you need to learn its scripting language to take full advantage of it. If the site does not allow HTML5 games then your going to need to learn Actionscript 3 and create games with Adobe Flash. [/quote] both of them are very unflexsible. maybe I should try stencyl?
  8. 2D engine for Kongregate?

    I am looking for free, open source, 2D engine that I can make games with for [url=""][/url] without coding.
  9. Future of Gaming: Facts

    [quote name='freeworld' timestamp='1326534900'] [quote name='coderx75' timestamp='1326378294']He also mentions the collapse of Moore's Law within the next 20 years. You're not going to see 204.8 Ghz processors on the current CPU architecture because it's simply impossible, not to mention that CPU speeds haven't increased since about 2005.[/quote]Remember moore's law has nothing to do with processor speed... rather the amount of transistors that can be fit in the same size area. The reason cpu speeds aren't increasing, is because the area is not being increase, it's being decreased, in favour of efficiency over brute force. [/quote] agree
  10. Future of Gaming: Facts

    [quote name='coderx75' timestamp='1326386801'] Then why did you include video of a physicist directly contradicting that belief? He states that things become erratic at small scales (nanotechnology) and that the calculation of 3 x 5 = 15 was a major step forward in quantum computing. He gives a timeline of Moore's Law breaking down in 15 to 20 years and quantum computers being usable in about 30, leaving a 10 to 15 year period of stagnation. We're a ways from quantum computing and nanotechnology is only taking us so far. It isn't, if fact "changing" the processor, only increasing efficiency to a point. Believe what you want but there will never be a 204.8 Ghz on a silicon-based chip, with or without nanotechnology.Look into light-based processing. I saw an article a few years ago about a team that used light, rather than electrons, to build a (at that time) table-sized processor and they were promising performance in the teraflops. You want pre-quantum speed, that's the best bet that I know of. [/quote] I just put that video to talk about AI. Quantum computers were in the video so..... hah damn. ;) [quote name='neutrix' timestamp='1326387611'] [quote name='coderx75' timestamp='1326378294']Quantum computing would be a great help (generate TONS of content and have some method of stripping away the silly/boring stuff) but I'll be nearing 70 years old by the time that happens.[/quote] It just so happens that I am writing up my doctorate in quantum computing at the moment. I am not fully convinced that what quantum computers are currently good for will have that much of an effect on the games industry. They are able to factor numbers exponentially faster, and they can search for marked elements in an unordered set quadratically faster, but other than that their uses are fairly specialised.Personally I think their main use will be simulating quantum mechanics, allowing us to gain a better insight in to how the world works. This is all assuming that they are actually able to be built. Last year a friend of mine performed an experiment that factored 21 (=3*7) using a photonic quantum circuit. This was incredibly difficult, and they had to use a number of shortcuts (they used the "compiled" version of Shor's algorithm for anyone who is interested), as maintaining the complex superpositions of the photons for the length of the computation is very hard. This leads me to believe that it is a very very long way off, even if it is possible. The machine they built isn't even a universal quantum machine, it just does that one specific task.As for the rest of the content of this post, I have to say that I think I agree with everything coderx75 has said (apart from the QC bit that I've just discussed).Nano technology may be the way forward for some areas, I especially think that it will help in materials science, but I'm still sceptical about it as the way to get processors up to that many GHz.Do you mind if I ask whether you are currently a scientist? Or studying physics at university or something like that? [/quote] I am not a scientist. LOL! [img][/img] And even if Moores law crashes in 20 years... this is 2012 right? We can improve microchips a little too much until that believe me. OH this is a gaming forum? [img][/img] I followed many physicists and scientists like this one and I believe that microchips, along with nano technology, are going to be more powerful in the future.
  11. Future of Gaming: Facts

    [quote name='coderx75' timestamp='1326378294'] Michio Kaku said it best. It would be 50 to 100 years before AI can best the human mind (make us dance around in a zoo, as he puts it). So, you're not going to see the video game becoming the video game developer any time soon. He also mentions the collapse of Moore's Law within the next 20 years. You're not going to see 204.8 Ghz processors on the current CPU architecture because it's simply impossible, not to mention that CPU speeds haven't increased since about 2005. There may be some small increases yet to come but, otherwise, we're reduced to adding cores for more power. Kaku also talks about quantum computing and this is where the real promise for the future of computing is. At that point, you're no longer talking about gigahertz but well beyond.Although I love what guys like Kaku and de Grasse are doing, they really are the TV personalities of physics. So, they know their stuff but they dumb it way down for their audience. The "retarded cockroach" is still a bad analogy for computing but, in this context, he's using it to give the audience a perspective on today's computers compared to the quantum computers of the future. Today, we're operating on retarded cockroaches, tomorrow, human brains. Bad analogy, good comparison. However, where you're getting the brain analogy from now makes some sense.I've been following the development of Infinity since it started years ago (journal is right here on GDNet if you haven't been). Procedural content is one of my main interests and I've been working with agent-based generation in order to achieve varied and interesting gameplay. After working with this for a few years, the limitations have become very, very obvious. It's not so much that we can't create "interesting" content, it's that the human brain is so goddamn hard to fool and "interesting" rarely means "fun". So, fun activities are few and far between and there's oddball things happening all the time.I'm very enthusiastic about this direction of game development (as you seem to be) but I'm also willing to admit that I may be on a fool's errand. Quantum computing would be a great help (generate TONS of content and have some method of stripping away the silly/boring stuff) but I'll be nearing 70 years old by the time that happens.It's good that you're excited about this stuff and you should certainly take part in it (we need all the help we can get). But, it's like Kaku said in your second video: "we're the ones that have to build this stuff". It's all so much easier said than done. [/quote] thanks for the comment. but I believe, and so do many scienctists, that nano technology is going to change, or better say, destroy proccesors and I dont believe that quantum computers will grow so fast from 3 x 5 = 15
  12. Future of Gaming

    People, I have made entry which should make this clearer. [url=""][/url]
  13. Second-person-shooter

    I was thinking about Third and First person games and I thought "What would Second person shooters (SPS) look like?" I camed up with with this. What if, instead of controlling your character directly, you control you character trough feelings? For example, in a boss battle, where boss "opens" for fire rarely, you have to build up patience and build down anger etc.?
  14. Future of Gaming

    [quote name='coderx75' timestamp='1326298175'] [quote name='LoreHunter' timestamp='1326271707']In this situation, you can look at the brain as a computer. Memory of how a certain object looks like - 3D model. You can look at decision making as combination of code lines, or AI; etc.[/quote]You have to understand your audience. Many of us understand this stuff at a pretty deep level. I can't look at the brain as a computer. Even the terms "memory" and "decision" mean completely different things when referring to the human brain and computer software/hardware, in both functionality and in their end results. I don't mean to nitpick but when you say something like " [left]machines as powerful as [sic] human brain", I have to ask what you're talking about. We're just not speaking the same language. You might as well have told me that the weather is quite automobile today.[/left] [/quote] Oh. I did not knew that this is "deep" for you. What do I need to do? Make it more simple or something? No offense , of course, but, I can not talk or write simpler then this.... or this is not what you are talking about?
  15. Future of Gaming: Facts

    [media][/media] [media][/media] Wiki article on Voxels.'s_law Wiki article on Moores law. Few days ago, I have made an article on Future of Gaming. Now I am talk about the facts that I should have included in last entry. Growth of computing power. Five years ago, I had a computer with 1.6 Ghz proccesing speed and 512 mega bytes of RAM. Back then it was enough for every game. I also had PS3 with 3.2 Ghz proccesing power and 512 mega bytes of RAM. I was amazed by graphics and games that PS3 could run. Today, 3.2 Ghz of proccesing power is minimum requirement for average games. 4 GB RAM has becamed standard RAM in our homes. Because of that, gaming companies are having problems in making games for consoles. Moores law says that computing power should double every 18 months. Speed of a human brain is speed of human thought. By 2020, computers will be as powerful as human brains. Many people asked me "Power of the human brain? What the hell is that?" If computer is as powerful as human brain, it means that its capable of being as smart as human. Today, however, they can only play chess. Lets do some calculations. If 3,2 Ghz of proccesing power is enough now, how much power would be enough in 2020?.About 204.8 Ghz!!! You dont trust me? Do that calculation by yourself! If computer is capable of having human-like intelligence, it means that computer itself can be kind of game developer. Now some people got this wrong. I did not said that every game should, or will, be infinite. Maybe you heard of Infinity: Quest for Earth. The studio thats making that game have 11 developers, and yet, they want to make universe thats infinite. That is, their engine will generate infinite worlds. But, most quests will be boring and, most of the time, not have any sense. That would change in the future. Engine (computer that is) would make interesting quests. And machines are not like humans. Even in WoW, quests get boring, eventually. But computer would think about every aspect of the quest. Is it too long? Too short? Does player need to travel a lot? How much EXP and gold would be enough for the quest? Computer would think about that and even more. Its just not worth counting, believe me . Now, graphics. Some people said "Computers as powerful as they can be". They are wrong. Scientists are making, at this moment, nano technology. Little bit of sci-fi right ? Search it on YouTube and you will see what am I talking about . Anyway nano technology is, basicly, same as technology we have today, only on molecular level. That means that I can put my laptop in a single microchip (and you thought that iPhone 4S is cool) . That means that future games, because of their graphics, will probably "weight" about 100Gb. Yep, cheap $hit. Please put some comments and let me know what do you think of this. ;)