Jump to content
  • Advertisement

EpsilonXIII

Member
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

181 Neutral

About EpsilonXIII

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. I've had this idea for an action-platformer game for quite some time. I've been calling it LiGHT, it's a game about traversing the underworld. The player is tasked with banishing a demon bound within a magic sword. Think Castlevania mixed with Dark Souls. 2D game. the players wields a cursed sword. his moveset is fairly simple: -walk/run/crouch/jump -slash -stab -throw weapon (slash+stab)   i tested it out on paper and it seemed pretty solid. but I later found that in practice, the combat felt too similar to the game Nidhogg. Which wasn't a problem, but I felt that it didn't have as much depth as i wanted it to have. So I came up with the idea of having various playerstates give you access to other moves.   think of it similar to a stance system, based on the players current state. Tell me what you think of these mechanics: (While Crouching Playerstate) Condition: player must be in crouching position -allows a sort of quick sidestep by simultaneously pressing left or right and jump (a la wavedashing) -auto-block towards basic frontal attacks -unable to attack (On Landing Playerstate) Condition: player must be moments from landing -allows an aerial recovery on landing by pressing jump, which can be followed up immediately by any input, (Weaponless Playerstate) Condition: the moments after the sword is thrown, and before it has returned to the player -allows for weak punches and kicks using slash/stab inputs -can move slightly faster -takes more damage -unable to block (While Running Playerstate) Condition: must be in running animation -can initiate a slide bypressing crouch (Dire Playerstate) Condition: player must be under 20% health -slow health regen up to 20% -Throw replaced by ranged blade attack -unable to walk, can only run -run speed increased These are only the ones i could think of. much more could be added as deemed necessary. What do you think? would the implementation of these player-states benefit the game, or would it just weigh down the gameplay?  
  2. I agree with Icebone. my design document is very minimalist when it comes to lore and story related bits. as would be when trying to pitch to a producer or investor. i put what a player should know upon buying the game first: -the name of the game -console(s) -what the game's about (small pararaph about world lore here) -what do you play as -what is your objective. then i flesh out the mechanics. i always start with the players moveset before anything else. with the moveset i start with the single button inputs first, then work into the more advanced ones. i like to design my games so that they are beatable with the basic inputs, but encourage the player to master the game through difficulty. -jumping (many paragraphs about jumping) >(advanced maneuvers involving jumping) >a bunch of sketches involving frames and playerstates -running (many paragraphs about running) >(advanced maneuvers involving running) >more sketches about frames and playerstates   -attacking (many paragraphs about the basic attacks) >(advanced combat maneuvers like parries and nonsense) >sketches of attacks and hitboxes ..and so on Gimmicks are next. whatever notable game mechanic that really differentiates your IP from the others. (think the soul mechanics from Dark Souls, light-based stealth from splinter cell, musical spells from 3d Zelda games) UI mechanics are next. I think of UI designs that emphasize what the player needs to focus the most on -main menu -HUD  -in game menus -etc.   items powerups, magic etc are listed next. i focus more on types as opposed individual items. i'd have a separate bible document for properly listing things.  then locations are listed in order of appearance. short sentence describing each zone. then enemies, in order of difficulty..  exact attack values, hp, and item drops and etc, i'd put in the bible doc. -enemy sketches -enemy locations -enemy descriptions -etc. then bosses... -description -moveset -sketches  detailed synopsis would be here at the end. nothing long and draining. just describing player events. -hero's journey context -the journey -the destination -the ending
  3. i'd probably go with 'on hit' conditions for the sake of simplicity. maybe even have the music increase as i gravitate towards the enemy. maybe make an exception if you stealthily kill the enemy. I wouldn't want some triumphant battle music to start blaring until i was spotted by an enemy. imagine trying to sneak up on a jaguar while some loud latin choir is chanting in your ear.  
  4. EpsilonXIII

    Currency in post-apoc / zombie world?

    I'd love to see baseball cards as a currency in a game.  maybe some sort of discontinued brand or something idk. i also like the idea of trading amounts of fuel and resources too. it opens up a lot of choices and gameplay consideration for the player. maybe you could have like some sort of container system for your currency a la zelda where the larger containers allow your cap to increase but also the amount you have to carry. 
  5. EpsilonXIII

    What do gamers prefer, graphics or gameplay

    I think the first thing to do is try and understand what type of audience you're trying to appeal to. The gaming audience as a whole is one of the most broken audiences i can think of.   i think for more casual audiences, the game's aesthetic takes priority. The success of a casual game depends more on its face value (i.e. polished visuals, accessibility, ability to hold the player's attention, etc.) as opposed to the overall quality of the gameplay. by focusing on graphics, you gain the benefit of attracting a wider group of people, but the longevity and memorability of the game suffers, as graphics become outdated with time. In other words, when graphics become the priority, you attract a large audience with a short attention span in regards to the actual IP and developer.   Which is definitely not a bad thing, just not the route i'd take as a game designer.   For the more 'hardcore' audiences (see: not casual), gameplay is very important. the success of the 'hardcore' game depends on the quality of the gameplay (i.e.tight controls, understandable learning curve, depth of mechanics, etc.) as opposed to the overall face-value. by focusing on the gameplay of a game, the longevity of the game skyrockets as the game holds the audiences attention by its quality of design, and because of that, doesn't need to be dragged down by graphics.  In other words, when gameplay becomes the priority, you may risk excluding some people, but the audience you attract is generally much more loyal to your IPs and team.     But to answer your question, focus on gameplay, and have the graphics be the icing on the cake.
  6. Oh, thank goodness, that's good to know.   I've been wondering about finding people to collaborate with on a game. I'd like to work with a group of people on a game from start to finish, Is there a forum for this? i didn't want to just randomly post somewhere. I
  7. i would like to work on games that have ideas that interest me. games with difficult, fast-paced, and deep combat systems.  I have a lot of ideas that translate well into the game medium, but i have no programming/coding experience.   What I do have, however, is tons of art experience. i'm skilled when it comes to art and animation, but everything else is moot.   I really want to make games, but how do i approach it without just being the useless ideas guy?     
  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!